PDA

View Full Version : The Wonder Woman View - confess you use it



Pages : [1] 2

Warbird-
04-15-2006, 10:06 PM

Zeus-cat
04-15-2006, 10:26 PM
I have the leotard, but I am still waiting for the red boots to be delivered. Once I have those, WW view will always be on.

_VR_ScorpionWorm
04-15-2006, 10:29 PM
Only after I get shotdown or land and externals are on.

TAW_Oilburner
04-15-2006, 10:40 PM
This may sound kinda stupid, but when I got IL-2 I didn't even know this view was available. I tried it about 6months ago and it's so disorienting I can't see how anybody uses it.

tHeBaLrOgRoCkS
04-15-2006, 10:56 PM
Only time I think I used it was offline to do a bit of video footage.

Still handy if you ever wonderd what it would be like to fly a goldfish bowl

steve_v
04-15-2006, 10:58 PM
nope. without cockpit orientation, I'm lost.

Deedsundone
04-15-2006, 11:00 PM
Never play on such servers so ...no.

Xiolablu3
04-15-2006, 11:19 PM
If the server allows it of course I turn it to WW view. No point in giving yourself a complete disadvantage.

I do however, prefer full cockpit servers.

arcadeace
04-15-2006, 11:42 PM
the WW days... when Arcadeace was indeed an ace http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

Xiolablu3
04-15-2006, 11:50 PM
Using WW and F6 is like a totally different kind of flying, like an action packed arcade game. Total turn and burn fun.


Cockpit on and full switch has much more of WW2 pilot 'feeling' tho, you could get bounced at any moment, your eyes and awraeness play a big part. Speed and energy management is much more important. I still have a bit of trouble looking around in a dogfight using hte hat switch tho.

Its like having two different games, I play both depending on how much time I have or what mood I am in.

Warclouds and Winds of War servers are great for hard difficulty.

Ukdedicated is great for the action packed, fun game.

To be honest I havent tried many other servers.

papotex
04-15-2006, 11:51 PM
ok... heres how i use it:

my cockpit is always on BUT when i have a bandit in my cross hairs and im ready to pull the trigger i may switch to no-cockpit view momentarily. this is to simulate that im moving my head forward so my view is not obtructed by the in cockpit view.

the view in this sim is as if WE the pilots had our head on a stick so.....

BfHeFwMe
04-16-2006, 01:29 AM
Open cockpits are like laying there after taking a solid punch from Tyson, where one of your eye's laying on the floor but still connected staring back into your good eye. If you hadn't passed out or puked up to that point, you will. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

vocatx
04-16-2006, 01:33 AM
I have never tried WW view. A couple of friends and I do, however, occassionally jump into a WW server, but we fly 'pit on. I never even tried any of those servers until a couple of months ago, when he suggested having a little fun on one.

I prefer "full switch", but sometimes I'll jump into a server with icons and speed bar, but I honestly don't even notice the speed bar is on for some time. I'm not used to having it available.

Tully__
04-16-2006, 02:01 AM
Except for accessing the TAS guage that's available in WW view during testing I haven't used it in a couple of years. Once I got used to cockpit I find I don't miss WW view much.

Z4K
04-16-2006, 03:10 AM
It boosts the framerate on my 933MHz P3 laptop...

x6BL_Brando
04-16-2006, 03:45 AM
I voted never, but I now recall using it once on a cross-country, treasure-hunt-type air race.
I see it as a training tool and I won't go into a combat server that has it enabled.

It reminds me of the old joke...

"My dog's got no nose" .. "Oh dear, how does he smell?" .. "effin disgusting, as it happens"

..... dunno why.

B. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

polak5
04-16-2006, 04:06 AM
Online i prefer not to http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

JG52Uther
04-16-2006, 04:07 AM
I think I turned WW on once,several years ago when I first got IL-2.Hated it,and never used it since.

antifreeze
04-16-2006, 04:26 AM
I now always join a WW server *knowing* that it's going to much more difficult to get kills, and that I'm going to be shot down much more often than on pit-on servers. If I accept that, and relax about it, the fact that most other pilots 1400 points and I have 120 doesn't bother me; I know I don't suck that much on pit-on servers, and that if WW view was off the kills would be more even.

It is funny if you ask everyone "so who's using WW?", you'll get a deathly silence back in the chat box, maybe one or two replying "not me". Always makes me chuckle.

Friendly_flyer
04-16-2006, 05:30 AM
Yes, yes, I confess (breaking down, crying uncontrollably).

Since it's impossible to move your head and have a look out of the cockpit when taking off or moving your head to the side to have a look down, I sometimes use the WW-view to get my bearing. Never in a dogfight, though.

RCAF_Irish_403
04-16-2006, 05:36 AM
no WW

rnzoli
04-16-2006, 05:45 AM
Originally posted by Warbird-:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif
Some guys shot me down from so far that I can´t believe they are not using the WW view.
Well, if you check my sig, you'll know what I sincerely answered.

But something struck me in your question: what the heck pit-off has with long-distance shots?

I have seen guys doing PK's beyond 400-500 meters on full switch.

Maybe you wanted a poll about the "realistic gunnery" option http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

idonno
04-16-2006, 06:52 AM
This brought to mind a joke I received in an e-mail recently. The joke was political so I've changed it slightly to make it relevant.

__________________________________________________ __
One day a fourth-grade teacher asked the children what their fathers did for a living. All the typical answers came up -- fireman, mechanic, businessman, salesman, doctor, lawyer, and so forth.

But little Justin was being uncharacteristically quiet, so when the teacher prodded him about his father, he replied, "My father's an exotic dancer in a gay cabaret and takes off all his clothes in front of other men and they put money in his underwear.

Sometimes, if the offer is really good, he will go home with some guy and make love with him for money."

The teacher, obviously shaken by this statement, hurriedly set the other children to work on some exercises and then took little Justin aside to ask him, "Is that really true about your father?"

"No," the boy said. "He flys Pacific Fighters on-line using Wonder Women view, but I was too embarrassed to say that in front of the other kids." http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

I voted Never! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Slickun
04-16-2006, 06:58 AM
I'm trying to swear off.

No kidding.

It's almost as hard as when I quit using smokeless tobacco.

StG2_Schlachter
04-16-2006, 07:07 AM
No. Except for Airracing, film making and testing.

LStarosta
04-16-2006, 08:02 AM
Only if the La-7 is available.


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

reverendkrv1972
04-16-2006, 08:18 AM
I don't go in them servers,and if i did...I'd fly with my pit on anyway.

voted never http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Pig_Mac
04-16-2006, 08:20 AM
I sometimes play on WWview servers but I ain't even got a key mapped for using the view.

Making insane longshots is more luck then use of WWview. I have made a few really lucky shots on enemies that were almost only dots.

Insane deflection shots and following manouvers thats they can't possibly see, nor expect if they are not using the view, are more a sign of you being at a disadvantage for not using it, while they are using it.

Xiolablu3
04-16-2006, 08:32 AM
Do you guys who say 'never' not realise what good training for deflection shooting WW view is?

Pulling off 'insane' deflection shots in WW view helps you to estimate lead on fighters in cockpit view.

Many of my shots are made when I cant see the enemy plane, he is below my engine. These sort of shots are honed in WW view.

Line up the enemy, allow for deflection, even if this means he is behind your engine and fire. How are you going to do this if you have never learnt how much deflection to allow in the first place>?

WW view is a great trainer of gunnery.

Brain32
04-16-2006, 08:35 AM
ONLY offline on Crimea map...at noon...with wind off http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif So testing only, fighting with open pit, not to mention padlock is just a big fun spoiler for me.
EDIT:

How are you going to do this if you have never learnt how much deflection to allow in the first place>?
Trial and error with the closed pit, how will you judge lead later when there is a pit around you?

idonno
04-16-2006, 08:40 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
...How are you going to do this if you have never learnt how much deflection to allow in the first place?

How about the way real fighter pilots learnt it? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Xiolablu3
04-16-2006, 08:45 AM
Originally posted by idonno:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
...How are you going to do this if you have never learnt how much deflection to allow in the first place?

How about the way real fighter pilots learnt it? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif OK next time you fly, when you die, pick up a gun and shoot yourself in the head.

You want reality? This is it ^ No second chances, real fighter pilots dont press 'refly'.

OK we meet int he middle, play until you die next in the game, then never play the game ever agian. I think thats pretty reasonable if you want more reality, dont you?

Xiolablu3
04-16-2006, 08:50 AM
Originally posted by Brain32:
ONLY offline on Crimea map...at noon...with wind off http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif So testing only, fighting with open pit, not to mention padlock is just a big fun spoiler for me.
EDIT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> How are you going to do this if you have never learnt how much deflection to allow in the first place>?
Trial and error with the closed pit, how will you judge lead later when there is a pit around you? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK that sentence was bad. I shouldnt have posted it. You dont NEED to use WW view, but its a great trainer.

I pride myself as a pretty good shot, and I used to fly WW a lot. I think it trained me up well for Full switch servers.

All I ewas trying to say was that girls are not going to fancy you more becasue you never fly WW view, if it aids you or trains you, use it.

Also WW games can be great fun. And some of the best pilots I know fly on WW servers as well as full switch.

I can just imagine you guys on a date, I bet you list it as one of your best qualities,

'Hey honey I fly a computer game with half the screen blocked off, I NEVER fly with the whole screen visible'
'Ohhh take me now!' http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

PBNA-Boosher
04-16-2006, 08:56 AM
When I'm racing with the IL2 Air Racing guys I use it because it's recommended to avoid a crash. That's about the only time unless I'm quickly trying to check my TAS.

idonno
04-16-2006, 09:02 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif OK next time you fly, when you die, pick up a gun and shoot yourself in the head.

You want reality? This is it ^ No second chances, real fighter pilots dont press 'refly'.

OK we meet int he middle, play until you die next in the game, then never play the game ever agian. I think thats pretty reasonable if you want more reality, dont you?

Acually I do prefer those servers that kick you for a while after so many deaths. However, your suggestion is just silly. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

thefruitbat
04-16-2006, 09:27 AM
I have to say i agree with xiolablu3 here. I've only recently converted from flying ww all the time.

When i first bought this game, the original il2, i came frome playing things like x wing alliance. I treated this game for the first two years as an arcade game in that vain, playing ww, no stalls etc... It wasnt untill after aces came out that i thought about trying this game online, mainly because at this point i was playing medal of honour online alot, the first game i ever really played online. Anyway, went online on ubi, and realised that i'd have to learn to fly with the realistic flight model.
In doing this, it without doubt lengthened my interest in the game, because of the fact that there was alwasy something new to learn. once i had got one thing down, onto the next whether cem, trim etc...

Now it is nearly all i play, most of my upgrades, and buying of equipment is centered around il2.

Before i got track ir, i used to play online using ww servers such as 334th and whatnot, and this is where i really learned my trade. Without this experience i dont think i would of found the cahnge from ww to cockpit on anywhere near as easy. And this espescially applies to gunnery.

At the moment i'm not really flying much online, because i'm working on using the force in my gunnery. That is the one thing i have noticed stepped down for me during the switch due to not being able to see the target plane often during the shot. But without the experience of deflection shooting that i already have, i would be finding this much harder. I would love to get my gunnery to where it was in 4.01 ww.

But this is another example of the games longetivity to me.

When i bought il2, it was a chance purchase. Without WW view, i doubt that at that time i would of been ready to be willing to learn everything in one go. I suppose it depends on where u came to this game from. if you already played flight simulators then i expect views would be different.

I also think that flying ww to pit on, is almost like 2 different games, there is a completely different feel to it, both have there merits, and both have there own set of aces.

To summerise, i fly cockpit on all the time now, but i'm really glad there was a WW view, to get me hooked on the game, as it did.

fruitbat

Xiolablu3
04-16-2006, 09:38 AM
Originally posted by idonno:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif OK next time you fly, when you die, pick up a gun and shoot yourself in the head.

You want reality? This is it ^ No second chances, real fighter pilots dont press 'refly'.

OK we meet int he middle, play until you die next in the game, then never play the game ever agian. I think thats pretty reasonable if you want more reality, dont you?

Acually I do prefer those servers that kick you for a while after so many deaths. However, your suggestion is just silly. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

As is yours to avoid playing great servers, with great people, purely because of some notion that it makes you a better person to avoid this type of game.

You are missing out on some excellent nights/games/people.

I am not saying that you are wrong not to use WW view, thats great. But dont look down on people who play in WW view, I know one or two who fly almost exclusively WW and I am sure they could beat a lot of you guys in a Full pit server. From what I have seen it has NO bearing on pilot quality whether people fly full pit or not. Many of the full switch guys have TrackIR (I dont, I have yo use my thumb to look around ), this gives them a great advantage over guys who dont.

If the server allows it dont be ashamed of switching it on, thats what its there for. The admin obvisouly prefers the game that way and has set up the server accordingly.


(For the record I love full pit servers and rarely play on WW any more, but I voted both.)

idonno
04-16-2006, 09:55 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
...this type of game.QUOTE]

That's pretty much what it boils down to, I'm not interested in a game. If I ever did log on to one of those game servers, I'd spend the whole time thinking; I could be flying a combat flight simulator instead of messing around here in arcade-land. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Chuck_Older
04-16-2006, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by Warbird-:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Some guys shot me down from so far that I can´t believe they are not using the WW view.

Be sincere.

No cokcpit makes you a better shot?

How? What's the difference between the accuracy you get with WW and the gunsight view?

Like many here, I need to be oriented by the cockpit and externals, plus, that what the pilots saw...I see photos of the Il2 ;simulators' at conventions, and it's WW, with gauges and whatnot in the 'pit...that doesn't help you fly very much

I used WW view once, in the original Il2. I hated it

By the way, I can make 'under the nose' shots with cockpit on very easily. I don't need to hone anything with WW, i hone it with cockpit on. Absolutely untrue that you *need* WW to do this. I can also make 90* deflection shots with the "OMG I can't see!" FW190. I guess I'm just teh best virtual pilot and marksman, ever http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

danjama
04-16-2006, 10:57 AM
I hate WW with a passion, people who use it are pathetic. It just defeats the point of playing a WW2 air combat simulation.

Gold_Monkey
04-16-2006, 10:59 AM
I feel like you're getting less "bang for your buck" using WW view.

Jumoschwanz
04-16-2006, 11:36 AM
If you do not like getting shot down by WW pilots making unrealistic shots as they pull lead on your craft because nothing is blocking their view like it would be in real life, then just do not fly on WW servers.

Now on full-real servers, I know for a fact there are guys who can still make the same type of lead shots, but they are making them blind! Yes they have learned to make shots at planes that they cannot see, that are somewhere behind the nose of their plane.
So at least when you do get your a ss handed to you it is by someone who has earned it through many hours of practice at making great shots, and not some arcade kiddie who is spraying a garden hose at you.
One of the keys to being a real ace on full-real type servers online it developing the ability to make leading and deflection shots at planes that you cannot see at the time you pull the trigger. Developing this skill is a combination of wanting to, some natural ability, and many hours of practice. If you can visualize it, then go for it, you will do it!

Time to evolve, and switch to full-realistic settings.

Jumoschwanz

Brain32
04-16-2006, 11:36 AM
Hey what's the problem here Xiola? Did anybody here even imply flying WW is bad or that people who use it are lesser virtual pilots? We simply enjoy closed pit A LOT, I simply don't get "the kick" without a pit around me, like Danjama said it doesen't feel(to us) like flying a WW2 air combat simulation that's it. I don't think WW users are *insert what you want here* important thing is to have fun(IMO), if you need justification for flying with WW don't look at us...

Xiolablu3
04-16-2006, 11:45 AM
Roger, sorry, I was getting the 'we are superior cos we never used WW in my life' feeling from some posts. Maybe it was my imagination.

Shame u left tonight Brain, I was waiting for you to come up so we could fight together (I took off as you landed) I am not too good in Blue planes, but I try my best. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Shot down one and got shot down twice.

As you are a veteren Blue pilot, could you answer my question in the CWOS FB/Il2 forum and see what you think?

Worf101
04-16-2006, 12:16 PM
I used it exclusively offline when playing for fun and before I got TrackIR. Now I'm full pit with occaisional externals.

Da Worfster

Vuco1
04-16-2006, 12:32 PM
Newer, but simply newer do I use WW. I rather be slaughtered by a bunch of guys that fly only La7/Yak3 whit WW. In any case I'm the moral winner even if my score is 50 and theirs is somewhere over 1000; I'm playing a simulation, they are playing airquake. And this game is labeled as a simulation if I'm not mistaken.

TheGozr
04-16-2006, 02:48 PM
Never on WW view, it's an insult to use WW IMO.
Also flying on servers with turbulences OFF i concidare as insulting as icons tags as well...... Ouch!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I realy think this. S~
--
But.... each his own way and that the beauty of the whole thing.. to have the choice to do what ever you wish that's great!. and make all happy and fun. WW has it's purpose, testing etc.. is a must sometime.

I'm Frank... ho!!.. but i am a real frank, Gaulois too btw http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BaronUnderpants
04-16-2006, 03:06 PM
Quote:

I hate WW with a passion, people who use it are pathetic. It just defeats the point of playing a WW2 air combat simulation.

End Quote.

________________________________________________


Quote:

In any case I'm the moral winner even if my score is 50 and theirs is somewhere over 1000; I'm playing a simulation, they are playing airquake. And this game is labeled as a simulation if I'm not mistaken.

End Quote.
________________________________________________


Quote:

Never on WW view, it's an insult to use WW IMO'

End Quote.
________________________________________________



Now, where ever would Xiolablu3 get the idea that Full Pit fliers concider them selfes superior to WW pilots. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

U people are realy something else http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

This is something that would STOP me from flying FR servers.....elitist garbage.

Bearcat99
04-16-2006, 03:11 PM
Offline for testing mainly.... I try to stay out of servers that use it. I really dont care for it unless there are no icons... Openpit+Icons=Arcadia to me.... Open pit with no icons I can tolerate a bit better. It can still be challenging.

BfHeFwMe
04-16-2006, 03:18 PM
Yeah, no need for snobbery, it's a game we all enjoy and have in common regardless of settings. I'll fight for your right to have it, even if I prefer not to use it.

As a few chaps have noted, if it weren't for that view they would have had a hard time adapting and growing with the sim, that makes it a good thing.

I can fly cockpit in WW servers and still have a good time. Usually icons are on, so it really doesn't become an issue. Hopefully the WW only guys will someday find the same fun in switch on servers. Not a yes or no brick wall here.

arcadeace
04-16-2006, 03:23 PM
Lol Gozr, you MACHO frank http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

TheGozr
04-16-2006, 03:33 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif -----

danjama
04-16-2006, 03:41 PM
Originally posted by BaronUnderpants:
Quote:

I hate WW with a passion, people who use it are pathetic. It just defeats the point of playing a WW2 air combat simulation.

End Quote.

________________________________________________


Quote:

In any case I'm the moral winner even if my score is 50 and theirs is somewhere over 1000; I'm playing a simulation, they are playing airquake. And this game is labeled as a simulation if I'm not mistaken.

End Quote.
________________________________________________


Quote:

Never on WW view, it's an insult to use WW IMO'

End Quote.
________________________________________________



Now, where ever would Xiolablu3 get the idea that Full Pit fliers concider them selfes superior to WW pilots. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

U people are realy something else http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

This is something that would STOP me from flying FR servers.....elitist garbage.

But what i said is actually true. Fair enough, WW is a learning aid. But it still defeats the point in playing a WW2 air sim. tell me im wrong, and believe it.

tHeBaLrOgRoCkS
04-16-2006, 06:20 PM
I use unlimited ammo and invicible switches when I am practicing against AI (still try to limit my self to a max 2 second burst though) or when experimenting with convergance. Hell I even use ww for that but I still find my self switching back to cockpit because I like to feel like I am in an aircraft and not some glass nosed rocket ship.

But mostly that is because I realy realy deteste the AI there scum I tell's yah

R988z
04-16-2006, 06:52 PM
I didn't realise there even was a WW view for a while and was flying full pit against people using WW for ages before I realised http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Then I switched and found it a bit easier, with some planes at least, for those that have terrible cockpit design with a poor view it's a major advantage, but otherwise these days I tend to prefer cockpit on servers, gives me more of a chance to get away (in theory at least... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif) though I do like externals as well so I can see where I am taxiing and for grabbing the odd screenshot on the fly, I never really use F6 though.

If the server allows it however, I go for WW view, it's alright for the odd arcade furball fun, but doesn't have the atmosphere and sheer nervewracking terror of flying full pit and wondering if the next cloud is hiding a bandit or three. I can feel my heartrate go up and the adrenaline flowing on full pit from the moment I take off. In servers with maps and icons and WW view I can see where they are and there is not the same kind of excitement. It is good for relaxing after a stressful day though, sometimes the last thing I need is more stress! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

nearmiss
04-16-2006, 07:23 PM
I've gotta admit it.

I use the virtual cockpit on takeoffs and landings, because I need the reference point of the nose going down or tail going down, etc. to get a feel for what I'm doing well. I crash my bums when trying to take off WW view.

I like the WW views when I'm airborne, because I can read those big A%% instruments. I can't read those little blurbs on the virtual panel. The compass is usually spinning like crazy and I can't figure out, which way I'm going, at least not with some dude on my six trying to make toast outta my backside.

The FW cockpits give me claustrophobia, along with most of the other pits. If Oleg would just give us translucent cockpit frames to choose. You could then have SA and still keep the bottom part of the cockpit to make all the purists happy.(I did say choose)

I hate the WW view with all those friggin' little arrows bouncing around. Those arrows make me "very nervous".

When I look down and I cannot see my lap...whew did I lose something or what?

----------------

Since I don't have peripheral vision I'm seeing into the sim world of aerial combat like looking through a "porthole". Shifting my views around is still a long way from anything close to "full real". So...when I read those comments from the so-called realism cockpit purists I say "posh".

SithSpeeder
04-16-2006, 07:30 PM
Open pit only rooms...I only fly those when my squadmates insist. And I begrudgingly fly Open Pit because it's too huge a disadvantage not to in those rooms (not only are you handicapping yourself with the restricted view, but you lose the "magic arrows" as well).

Luckily there are a few of us in my squad who really like closed pit and we've just recruited a bunch of new guys who like it closed as well.

Closed pit may be restrictive, but I love the feel to the game (gotta have TrackIR to fully enjoy it though, IMO).

When offline or when online without a significant Open Pit squad representation, I will ALWAYS fly Closed Pit.

* _54th_Speeder *

ATLAS_DEATH
04-16-2006, 08:29 PM
I only fly on closed pit servers with no externals.. for dogfight types... for coop if we are all on the same team, externals are fine for me... If I am going to hunt someone.. I want them to be able to hunt me too.. without seeing them so easily or being able to fly around with externals and get better views. But that's just me.. Offline I fly closed pit so I am always used to it. I also use externals for offline.. that way I have something to do when I have to fly for an hour to target.. or just want to do some cool moves http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

AKA_TAGERT
04-16-2006, 08:58 PM
Originally posted by Warbird-:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Some guys shot me down from so far that I can´t believe they are not using the WW view.

Be sincere. what is the WW view?

Snowman1025
04-16-2006, 09:30 PM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Warbird-:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Some guys shot me down from so far that I can´t believe they are not using the WW view.

Be sincere. what is the WW view? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would like to know too...

steve_v
04-16-2006, 09:48 PM
http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/1260/2076br.jpg

Max.Power
04-16-2006, 09:53 PM
There's this really weird partisan sentiment that comes from the guys who fly full switch. Personally, I think it's stupid. Fly full switch if you like, but don't think that WW view is all idiots with tin foil hats on flying with the wsad keys. I have met and flown with some intelligent guys/ experienced virtual pilots, and even some bona fide combat pilots who fly WW servers. It's not all TnB goofballs. Personally, I prefer it to the hatswitch manipulation game that full switch servers offer and I am not a newb pilot- moreover, I am CERTAINLY not a TnBer.

SithSpeeder
04-17-2006, 12:16 AM
LMAO @ Steve_v! That's priceless.

* _54th_Speeder *

GR142-Pipper
04-17-2006, 12:33 AM
My view is that WW is a step in the process from learning to fly to regular participation on full real servers.

I do feel that the full real environment is by far the most demanding on the pilot. However, at the end of the day this game is a passtime and the point is to enjoy it at whatever level you want.

GR142-Pipper

Lucius_Esox
04-17-2006, 03:07 AM
As some settings make it too hard WW view makes it too easy imho. How can you sneak up on someone, have it done to you?

Makes for a totally different gaming experience,,, it's arcade!!! simple as that..

I do get a buzz flying on WW servers with pit on though,, makes killing and surving a very sweet feeling, one not felt that often I might add http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Tully__
04-17-2006, 04:43 AM
Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
My view is that WW is a step in the process from learning to fly to regular participation on full real servers.

I do feel that the full real environment is by far the most demanding on the pilot. However, at the end of the day this game is a passtime and the point is to enjoy it at whatever level you want.

GR142-Pipper
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

I've always been of the opinion that ppl should fly the settings they like. I think all the macho hype from the full switch crowd is just them trying to bring more inexperienced full switch players to the full switch servers coz they're looking for more easy targets http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Xiolablu3
04-17-2006, 07:37 AM
Originally posted by Tully__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
My view is that WW is a step in the process from learning to fly to regular participation on full real servers.

I do feel that the full real environment is by far the most demanding on the pilot. However, at the end of the day this game is a passtime and the point is to enjoy it at whatever level you want.

GR142-Pipper
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

I've always been of the opinion that ppl should fly the settings they like. I think all the macho hype from the full switch crowd is just them trying to bring more inexperienced full switch players to the full switch servers coz they're looking for more easy targets http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

SUPERAEREO
04-17-2006, 07:59 AM
Dunno really , I fly with whatever settings I feel like: while I agree that full switch is more immersive I don't see anything wrong in using WW view in servers that allow it.

Gaming is meant to be fun and I feel no need to prove how "macho" I am by not playing a quick game of aerial Quake if that is what I feel like... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif


S!

Old_Canuck
04-17-2006, 08:48 AM
I used to check out WW view once in awhile to get a better look at the scenery but lately the scenery all looks the same.

WWSensei
04-17-2006, 11:06 AM
Don't even have the key mapped. Not out of some sense of superiority but because I, personally, don't like it. It's the same reason I don't fly some aircraft--simply don't like it (IAR-80 anyone? gods I hate that aircraft).

nearmiss
04-17-2006, 11:52 AM
WW = Wonder Woman

Don't you remember Wonder Woman flys in a transparent aircraft...in comic books, right.

achtung2004
04-17-2006, 12:15 PM
WW is exactly what this sim/game needs. It lets new pilots become comfortable with the aircraft, deflection shooting and basic combat manuvers. I agree that it is a help with learning deflection shooting. In the end fly what you like...... closed pit is certainly more enjoyable once you make the leap.

BrewsterPilot
04-17-2006, 12:20 PM
I confess. I only fly in servers with the wonder-woman view.

briyeo
04-17-2006, 01:05 PM
I fly the settings that the guys I want to fly with use, whatever they are. This usually means WW is on, but then I have only just got myself a stick with a hatswitch on. The beauty of the game is that you will find people who fly to your level and settings, and you will have fun. Its not just skill levels that differ, but equipment levels too, and Im a bit short in both departments http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

carguy_
04-17-2006, 02:54 PM
Used WW view once or twice in distant past.


I had a micro crisis with low fps.The pit takes like 15fps away.When I needed fps I turned every video option down except the cockpit.

Also I never play racing games that don`t have cockpit view unless it`s a PS2 Gran Turismo.

Stigler_9_JG52
04-17-2006, 04:02 PM
NEVER.

EVER.

EH-VUH.

As the guy who coined the term, it would be unseemly. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Not only don't I rely on this inexcusable crutch, I went into the settings and took OUT the key assignment; so there's not even a chance that a clumsy keystroke could bring that abomination up on my screen.

Those of you who did admit it, I give you credit for admitting it in public, but you're still shamless [channeling Schwarzenegger accent] girly men for using it. Consider a return to Crimson Skies and don't come back. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

And it's not about "full switch snobbery", either. Full switch has its own problems with realism. My reasoning is, WW view goes way, WAY too far towards trying to solve the problem it supposedly helps the player with: that of an obstructed view. While I can be persuaded that the bars we have are a bit more restrictive, especially in concert with our "fixed" virtual heads... there is no WAY I'll ever stomach the idea that your view through the front panel, the nose of the aircraft, the fuselage body and the wings "just aren't there" for your convenience. If you can countenance that, you're a Quake player, pure and simple.

Max.Power
04-17-2006, 04:05 PM
LOL! Here's the low grade hostility I was talking about. So overstated... Freud would have a field day with something like this. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Xiolablu3
04-17-2006, 04:06 PM
Originally posted by Max.Power:
LOL! Here's the low grade hostility I was talking about. So overstated... Freud would have a field day with something like this. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Chuck_Older
04-17-2006, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
NEVER.

EVER.

EH-VUH.

As the guy who coined the term, it would be unseemly. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Not only don't I rely on this inexcusable crutch, I went into the settings and took OUT the key assignment; so there's not even a chance that a clumsy keystroke could bring that abomination up on my screen.

Those of you who did admit it, I give you credit for admitting it in public, but you're still shamless [channeling Schwarzenegger accent] girly men for using it. Consider a return to Crimson Skies and don't come back. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

And it's not about "full switch snobbery", either. Full switch has its own problems with realism. My reasoning is, WW view goes way, WAY too far towards trying to solve the problem it supposedly helps the player with: that of an obstructed view. While I can be persuaded that the bars we have are a bit more restrictive, especially in concert with our "fixed" virtual heads... there is no WAY I'll ever stomach the idea that your view through the front panel, the nose of the aircraft, the fuselage body and the wings "just aren't there" for your convenience. If you can countenance that, you're a Quake player, pure and simple.

You know why I like you, Stig?

You post stuff other folks are afraid to even mention http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

TheGozr
04-17-2006, 04:36 PM
I understand when someone says that they have to start with ww... but.. big mistake first this is a sim or i list what we want to beleive. so and by learning to loong with ww you'll get bad habit.
To me ww view is ONLY good to see the speed for test and for the one who have some real hardware cockpit on big screens, this is the only reason i see why to use a ww . the rest i think like i said earlier, i feel very strong about that as well with turbulences,clouds and tags.

It is nothing to do with macho, swicth or what ever else . it's very strong statement when i say that but it is an insult to the aircrafts. Don't get lazy and learn the right way and the only good way.. period.

lets try tomorrow morning you'll wake up and you will decide that you have to force yourself to learn with Cockpit on and there is no other solution, you'll see you will like it and no way back.. this is a favor you will make to yourself.

Thank you.

Xiolablu3
04-17-2006, 05:04 PM
Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
If you can countenance that, you're a Quake player, pure and simple.

You know why I like you, Stig?

You post stuff other folks are afraid to even mention http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


You really believe this? Sounds like complete BS to me. People arent 'afraid' to post this wort of thing, just that many here would not, and are able to see its complete BS.

I know flyers who fly WW servers as well as full switch and they are absolute Aces on both types. In fact a couple I have NEVER seen get shot down on a full switch server and have racked up kill after kill.

How does this work with his theory of 'WW flyers being Quake players'?

Chuck_Older
04-17-2006, 05:08 PM
Stigler posts exactly what's on his mind and makes no excuses. He takes his stand, expresses his opinion, and the chips fall where they may

Yeah, I admire that. Problems? If there are any, they ain't mine http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif I think it's an admirable trait to speak up and say what you want to say even if you know it's unpopular

Your signature line touches on this a bit- I don't have to like what Stig posts- but I like how he says it, and I think he's right to say it

tHeBaLrOgRoCkS
04-17-2006, 05:16 PM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
. Consider a return to Crimson Skies and don't come back. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif




CrImSoN SkIyZ WuZ TeH PoOcHeS PuRsE http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

96th_Nightshifter
04-17-2006, 05:31 PM
I fly in UKDed1 & 2, War Clouds, Spits V 109s and Winds of War - these servers are all different settings : "Wonder Woman" View, Pit on WITH externals, full switch but with name tags at close range to full switch with speed bar and I enjoying flying in all of them. I see no problem whatsoever in playing in a server that suits your mood - there is nothing inferior or superior about any of them IMO.

I feel no shame about flying in servers with Wonder Woman view, why would anyone feel shame about this? - it's ridiculous, no apologies needed for enjoying your game which you paid for and I agree with Xiola that some of the best virtual pilots I have ever seen can fly in Wonder Woman and Full switch servers and there skill shines through in both of them.

I'll also admit I prefer seeing the cockpit and it adds to the immersion but I mean really, its just a game (call it a simulation but it will ALWAYS be a game in the end), games are meant to be fun and if you can only get your kicks by flying in one type of setting then so be it - I prefer to have more options and enjoy this game to its fullest which means having a go at all the options and enjoy meeting the people that fly in these different servers.
The ONE thing that I think that EVERYONE would agree on is that Wonder Woman view is ruined by the dreaded F6 key - bring on BoB with the added track IR views.

So yes, I confess - I have and still do use Wonder Woman view from time to time and will feel no shame about it and neither should anyone else.

MLudner
04-17-2006, 06:24 PM
I will admit that I have been cajoled into using it by my squadron mates in the 334th.

I'm still agin it, though. I'm already considering completely abandoning it. The inability to tell what my aircraft is doing is driving me nuts at times and it just does not seem right, because no real life pilot had a transparent fuselage and little arrows telling him where the bad guys are.

But, then again: it is just a game. Particularly online.

In my offline campaigns: Never. They're about replaying history as best I can.

Xiolablu3
04-17-2006, 06:24 PM
Great post Nightshifter, I know you can play both settings cos I have seen u fly brilliantly whether its Pit on or off.



Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
Stigler posts exactly what's on his mind and makes no excuses. He takes his stand, expresses his opinion, and the chips fall where they may

Yeah, I admire that. Problems? If there are any, they ain't mine http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif I think it's an admirable trait to speak up and say what you want to say even if you know it's unpopular

Your signature line touches on this a bit- I don't have to like what Stig posts- but I like how he says it, and I think he's right to say it

Sorry Chuck, I thought you were agreeing with him.

I dont like people acting superior and putting others down for such stupid reasons as playing a computer game on different settings thats all.

I want to make it clear that not all Full switch flyers think like this and if people enjoy WW settings servers then dont ever feel ashamed of it, some are absolutly amazing.

The make up of the maps, other players, admins and planesets are much more important than if it uses WW or not.

Like NightShofter, I wish there was a way to turn off the padlock F6 key but keep externals. That way you could see your airfield, see the lovely plane skins and so on without having the F6 padlock enabled all the time. Having F6 available in Mission based servers is not too good because people can just fly around pressing F6 all the time to make sure they arent being bounced, it ruins the strategic part of fighting. Presently if you have externals enabled you MUST have F6 padlock too.

TheGozr
04-17-2006, 06:30 PM
Well Just a game just a game that what separate some with the others. For some it's a game and it's find for others it's an Hobby as much as a hobby can be, with teh study of aircrafts, History an the whole deal around ww2 era. Now for those who concidere this just a game it is insulting to others.
So WW view is a shame and yes you should be a shame period it's clear and simple now deal with it.
The other wich concidere this as a hobby have fun and S~.

rovens
04-17-2006, 06:31 PM
Yeah ill admit to using it, but ill also admit to being a noob http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Im slowly getting away fomr it though, i fly pretty much full switch with the exception of that view and i never use the F6 key. I just have real trouble using my hat to manipulate the views fast enough to keep track of an aircraft.

Xiolablu3
04-17-2006, 06:35 PM
Originally posted by TheGozr:
For some it's a game


Just a quick heads up.

It has and will always be a game.

MLudner
04-17-2006, 06:51 PM
Originally posted by rovens:
Yeah ill admit to using it, but ill also admit to being a noob http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Im slowly getting away fomr it though, i fly pretty much full switch with the exception of that view and i never use the F6 key. I just have real trouble using my hat to manipulate the views fast enough to keep track of an aircraft.

You should try using your mouse. It's the next best thing to Track IR. Use it from the opposite hand you fly with (For me, the left.)

Stigler_9_JG52
04-17-2006, 08:10 PM
"just a game"? How about "just (another) excuse?"

Blah, blah, blah.... "play according to your mood"... "you paid for the game", so who cares if you wimp out on the challenge? Whatever. I've heard all these selfsame, identically phrased excuses from the "EZ Mode" fliers in Warbirds who needed training wheels to hack a physics-based flight model, and I didn't give an inch for those bozos, either.

Yeah, buddy, keep telling yourself those lies. Whatever makes you feel better. But deep down, inside you know... YOU JUST CAN'T HACK IT.

Actually, "it's just a game" is somewhat true; but it's only true because the sim's modeling is so poor and falls well short of an accurate sim. But, still, that's no excuse for the players to just shrug their shoulders and make things easier on themselves. Just man up and take on the challenge of the sim, whatever it is. It doesn't matter if the sim itself can even provide 100% realism; any self-respecting sim player will take on 100% of even an "incomplete" challenge.

Followup poll: Do you guys also play with unvulnerability, unlimited ammo and other gamer crutches with about the same basis in realism as WW View?

Do you also play competitive sports with small children and "mop the floor with them" just because you're much older, bigger and you just can? The same kind of pathetic search for a total lack of challenge.

Actually, now that I think of it, naming that view Wonder Woman kind of does a disservice to a few "real women" we have flying in this community; even they don't use this shortcut. But, the analogy of WW's invisible plane kind of overrides the latent sexism. So, ladies, forgive me. I'm more appealing to these wimps' sense of testosterone than I am making any comment about women.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

Stigler_9_JG52
04-17-2006, 08:14 PM
Originally posted by TheGozr:
Well Just a game just a game that what separate some with the others. For some it's a game and it's find for others it's an Hobby as much as a hobby can be, with teh study of aircrafts, History an the whole deal around ww2 era. Now for those who concidere this just a game it is insulting to others.
So WW view is a shame and yes you should be a shame period it's clear and simple now deal with it.
The other wich concidere this as a hobby have fun and S~.

Gold star for the Gozr. Right said.

steve_v
04-17-2006, 08:45 PM
http://home.earthlink.net/~viner45/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/143.gif
You are welcome to express your perspective. You are not welcome to express your perspective of other members. Thats how threads get locked and vacations issued.

tHeBaLrOgRoCkS
04-17-2006, 09:22 PM
Something tells me about the only time so called full switch and WW types ever get together is when they post on this forum.

So why all the broohaha shouldnt you all be having fun in your respective little worlds?

Charos
04-18-2006, 12:08 AM
I am wonder woman , watch me soar

I am wonder woman , watch me soar
In numbers too big to ignore
And I see too much to go and not pretend
cause I've been blinded by bars before
And I've been down there on the cockpit floor
No one's ever gonna keep me down again

CHORUS
Oh yes I am Invisible
But it's Invisibility born of pain
Yes, I've paid the price
I wont be shot down again
If I have to, I will do anything
I am uber (uber)
My planes invisible (invisible)
I am wonder woman

You can shoot but never change me
cause it only serves to derange me
More determined to achieve my final goal
And I come back even stronger
Not a noob any longer
cause you've deepened the scar on my soul

CHORUS
I am wonder woman, watch me buy it
cockpit bars I just wont try it
As I spread my crate far across the land
But I'm still an embryo
With a long long way to go
Until I make my full switch brother understand

Oh yes I am Invisible
But it's Invisibility born of pain
Yes, I've paid the price
I wont be shot down again
If I have to, I will do anything
I am uber (uber)
My planes invisible (invisible)
I am wonder woman
Oh, I am wonder woman
I am invisible
I am uber

FADE
I am wonder woman
I am invisible
I am uber
I am wonder woman

tHeBaLrOgRoCkS
04-18-2006, 12:13 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif Well one good thing came out of this debate anyhow http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

The_Gog
04-18-2006, 02:43 AM
I wouldn't lower myself to play on a server with externals!

rnzoli
04-18-2006, 03:04 AM
now that this issue settled peacefully, let's start our quarterly match about icons/no-icons http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/crackwhip.gif

i think the last time the no-icon advocates won http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

however, there are fundamental questions that always get mixed up in these threads:

- with higher difficulty settings, the IL2 program gives you more difficult challenges and less aid to solve them

- the program is a game, if you play it for pure fun, but it can also deliver the closest simulation of WW2 aircombat, if you set it up like that, and accept that WW2 air combat wasn't always fun, but sometimes boring, confusing and disappointing

- the perceived realism of those challenges differ depending whether you want to imitate the OUTCOME or the CHALLENGES of WW2 air combat.

- the guys flying with less constraints are usually mocked and teased by people playing with harder settings, which produces the typical (but incorrect) "higher difficulty = less realism" counter-argumentation, instead of standing up for the right to set up the software the way you like, not the way others like, that's why Oleg allowed these various settings in the first place.

No surprise that all these repeated threads always boil down to this: each to his own.

TheGozr
04-18-2006, 03:26 AM
accept that WW2 air combat wasn't always fun, but sometimes boring, confusing and disappointing


Well,.. interesting point of view that we have here.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif

panther3485
04-18-2006, 03:40 AM
Hi there, rog

Quote:
"Something tells me about the only time so called full switch and WW types ever get together is when they post on this forum.
So why all the broohaha shouldnt you all be having fun in your respective little worlds?"

Good post. Good question!

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif


Best regards,
panther3485

P.S. Notice, so far I've carefully avoided taking a position on this!

Cajun76
04-18-2006, 03:41 AM
Just for the record, I fly pit off most of the time. I don't like icons on the map, or unlimited ammo or anything like that. It's a view preference that has to do with SA. It doesn't happen to disorient me. I take it as a point of pride that there have been times when I have been asked if I have my pit on, because I fly like it's there. I never use F6, and I handle my crate like I would the real thing to the best of my ability and based on the sim/game's strengths and weaknesses.

Stiglar's certainly entitled to his opinion, but it's like some average Joe walking up to Steven Hawking and asking "Dude, why don't you say something intelligent instead of just mumbling and drooling?"

For me, it's not about sneaking up on some dot and blowing them to hell 'cause they never saw me. Doing that on a server where you take off at random in a gaggle is nothing close to "full real" "full Switch" or "full machismo".

Coops can approach this feeling of "full real" immersion, but if it's a dogfight server you're fooling yourself if you think it's not "arcady".

Personally, I prefer a straight up fight, a duel, a joust. The other pilot knows exactly where I am. I know where they are. Maybe they're in a 109 and they have altitude on my Jug. This is where combat skills are tested imho. Being able to outmaneuver that 109 by using whatever experience and skills I have (rusty and limited as they are right now) is far more satisfying to me that hitting them when they never saw me.

To me, it puts everyone on a level playing field. With my eyesight and the high res I prefer to run the sim/game at, I can't see the little dots that are supposed to be the enemy. Should I be penalized while using a sim/game I purchased because I don't have 20/20 or better?

I love history, and I am in awe of these men and women who battled in the skies and on the ground, at sea and under it 60+ years ago. My view preference has no bearing on that. To each their own, good luck and

danjama
04-18-2006, 03:54 AM
Xiola i love your sig!

On icons: I will only fly no icons atall if i am on comms, but even then i really dislike no icons. I am happy with just short friendlies, or short plane type, anything of that nature. I dont mind full icons, but one thing i HATE is when the icons are set to like 9.0 or whatever it is that some hosts do. Its crazy. Does build up tension though.

On views: Fly what you enjoy best. As long as i can fly what i like, it has no effect on me what you or anybody else flies.

rnzoli
04-18-2006, 04:39 AM
Originally posted by Cajun76:
but if it's a dogfight server you're fooling yourself if you think it's not "arcady".
It's certainly not fully historic, but there is a major difference between the atmosphere of easy and difficult servers. You can see far less *******s on the difficult servers, because the hard settings scare them away quickly, and there is a greater comradeship between the players, due to the common difficulties with ID-ing, poor rear views etc. Even between players of opposing teams.

So don't fool yourself, difficult servers attract a slightly more serious and dependable crowd, than easy servers. There are several individual exceptions, of course, but the tendency is hard to deny (just check chat logs).


Originally posted by Cajun76:
Personally, I prefer a straight up fight, a duel, a joust. The other pilot knows exactly where I am. I know where they are.
That's an honorable preference, I would only like to add, that full difficulty settings do not exclude those fights at all. Since everyone knows that no keys, arrows, or icons will help them, it is very difficult to carry out a successful surprise attack in the first place. Many of such attempts fail and turn into the classic T&B or B&Z fights, everyone knowing exactly where the other is.
However, such duels without glass cocpits are more rich in tactical options, as such *edit: escape* manouvers exploiting visual blind spots, or the use of the Sun (a classic real-life combat tool).

rnzoli
04-18-2006, 04:55 AM
Originally posted by panther3485:
Hi there, rog

Quote:
"Something tells me about the only time so called full switch and WW types ever get together is when they post on this forum.
So why all the broohaha shouldnt you all be having fun in your respective little worlds?"

Good post. Good question!

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif


Best regards,
panther3485

P.S. Notice, so far I've carefully avoided taking a position on this!

Confess up, panther! Come out of the closet! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Looking back to what circumstances lauch these threads, the pattern is this: people want to explore what this program gives them, and some start to tinker with the difficulty settings (turn on some stuff, or join servers with more constraints). So there is a small, but constant 'traffic' between these 2 worlds, they are not so isolated at all, in fact they are only a few mouse-clicks away http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Now these are the 2 scenarios that happen:
a) the guy is disappointed, cannot cope, doesn't like it - and he starts a thread explaining how stupid and unrealistic such setting is, while the FR crowd quickly moves into the defence of using that option, and downgrades the person failing to make the change.

b) the guy is happy, copes with it, likes it - and he posts how nicely he upgraded into the other domain of players, so the easy crowd quickly moves into defense of not using that option, and downgrades the person making the change.


So it's the traffic ("defectors) between these 2 worlds, which causes those repeated battles over these issues all the time.

96th_Nightshifter
04-18-2006, 05:31 AM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
"just a game"? How about "just (another) excuse?"

Blah, blah, blah.... "play according to your mood"... "you paid for the game", so who cares if you wimp out on the challenge? Whatever. I've heard all these selfsame, identically phrased excuses from the "EZ Mode" fliers in Warbirds who needed training wheels to hack a physics-based flight model, and I didn't give an inch for those bozos, either.

Yeah, buddy, keep telling yourself those lies. Whatever makes you feel better. But deep down, inside you know... YOU JUST CAN'T HACK IT.



The above that you mentioned are not "excuses", the are in fact "reasons"; nobody is wimping out here? I fly on all settings so where does the "YOU JUST CAN'T HACK IT" come from?

It's ridiculous, some people don't ALWAYS play the "game" the way YOU play it so you feel the need to insult them? Are you actually reading what people are saying here or do you just see "Wonder Woman" view and climb up onto your high horse to start having a go at people.
Take a step back from your pc and realise you are sitting in a room playing a "game" which I also consider a hobby as you do (yes a game can in fact be a hobby) and ask yourself if name calling about different peoples settings is really worth it.
Once again, I feel no shame in flying in all these different kinds of servers, some of which use "Wonder Woman" view, some of which are full switch and in doing so does not make me a lesser person or a "wimp" as some may say - if it makes YOU feel better to call people names then have fun with that.

Bearcat99
04-18-2006, 05:57 AM
Sometimes this place is surreal....

danjama
04-18-2006, 06:31 AM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Sometimes this place is surreal....

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

panther3485
04-18-2006, 07:14 AM
Hi there, rnzoli

Quote:
"Confess up, panther! Come out of the closet!"

Alright, consider this my 'coming out':

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

First, for perspective, I have never played online so my opinions are formed entirely by a combination of offline experience (but a lot of it), my observations and what I hope is a fair combination of knowledge and common sense.

(a) IL-2 and FB/AEP/PF are never going to be anything more than 'just games' to many players. To me, however, they rate a little extra over this and IMHO, they are a bit more more than 'just games'.

(b) When 'flying', I generally have cockpit on (perhaps 75 percent of the time) but sometimes I use 'WWV' just for a change (perhaps 15 percent). It can be fun.
Occasionally, I even go totally external and play from outside/behind my plane for a while (maybe 10 percent). This can be a lot of fun, too, enjoying the look of my own plane, the scenery, the sky, my wingman etc all from a totally external view.

(c) I don't have anything fancy (such as TrackIR) for my views - just the hatswitch, numpad, mouse and PageDown/End etc.

(d) I dislike padlock and use it as little as possible.

(e) I have been playing the IL-2 series ever since they came out and I still get great enjoyment and immersion.

(f) I don't give a toss how anyone else plays. You paid for it, you can use it any way you like.

I'm happy to explain my opinions further if anyone is curious but:
Finally, after all this time and reading 14,728 threads on the subject, I think I've almost certainly heard all the arguments, both ways. My opinion and that's that.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif


Best regards,
panther3485

jasonbirder
04-18-2006, 07:29 AM
Its a game...PERIOD
If you enjoy flying without the pit on - have fun! Its your free time - have as much fun as you can...
I fly because for a couple of hours a week I get to pretend I'm flying a hot World War II plane - its a bit of escapism for me...If anyone that wants to invest any more significance than that in how people fly/play the game needs to take a look at themselves and their priorities in life http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
I fly pit on...but theres no significance there...i'm a terrible pilot...but I don't lose sleep about it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Weather_Man
04-18-2006, 09:26 AM
For me it's All Wonder Woman All the Time!

That's the way I like it and I cannot be convinced it's not better. Tried with cockpit on plenty of times online and it seemed very foreign. The experiences consisted of agonizingly long periods of boredom punctuated by fleeting moments of sheer terror. No icons just adds aggravating frustration to the mix.

Give me non-stop action and give me unrestricted views. That is how I enjoy the game and why I've played so long. If I could not have that I would have shelved it after 3 weeks.

fighter_966
04-18-2006, 09:30 AM
After reading all the thread... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

TheGozr
04-18-2006, 10:23 AM
Funny thing that there is always this just a game coming back lol,, anyway no matter what server with on or off pit or icons it is simple to have the choice to turn off icons if there is or be in a pit when is off just a matter of a key stroke anyway, if i'm going to some server with pit off or icons on i just simply leave it and fly like i like, it's basicly simple.
Some people beleive in one or an other bible and exeed far more than a hobby states.. to me it's "just a book".. each his own.

Now in many occasions lazyness can be confused with many other excuses.
Can't see the icons on screen... well adjust your settings or get closer to your monitor.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

crazyivan1970
04-18-2006, 10:33 AM
To each its own, nothing to confess there.

rnzoli
04-18-2006, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by panther3485:
Finally, after all this time and reading 14,728 threads on the subject, I think I've almost certainly heard all the arguments, both ways. My opinion and that's that.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

OMFG, you have COUNTED them? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Well, you can imaginge how many "new arguments" will come out of the next ~20.000 threads...

BaronUnderpants
04-18-2006, 01:24 PM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
"just a game"? How about "just (another) excuse?"

Blah, blah, blah.... "play according to your mood"... "you paid for the game", so who cares if you wimp out on the challenge? Whatever. I've heard all these selfsame, identically phrased excuses from the "EZ Mode" fliers in Warbirds who needed training wheels to hack a physics-based flight model, and I didn't give an inch for those bozos, either.

Yeah, buddy, keep telling yourself those lies. Whatever makes you feel better. But deep down, inside you know... YOU JUST CAN'T HACK IT.

Actually, "it's just a game" is somewhat true; but it's only true because the sim's modeling is so poor and falls well short of an accurate sim. But, still, that's no excuse for the players to just shrug their shoulders and make things easier on themselves. Just man up and take on the challenge of the sim, whatever it is. It doesn't matter if the sim itself can even provide 100% realism; any self-respecting sim player will take on 100% of even an "incomplete" challenge.

Followup poll: Do you guys also play with unvulnerability, unlimited ammo and other gamer crutches with about the same basis in realism as WW View?

Do you also play competitive sports with small children and "mop the floor with them" just because you're much older, bigger and you just can? The same kind of pathetic search for a total lack of challenge.

Actually, now that I think of it, naming that view Wonder Woman kind of does a disservice to a few "real women" we have flying in this community; even they don't use this shortcut. But, the analogy of WW's invisible plane kind of overrides the latent sexism. So, ladies, forgive me. I'm more appealing to these wimps' sense of testosterone than I am making any comment about women.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

U sound exactly like a guy who hates been hunted down and shot to peices by a noob pilot u feel is inferior to u...something that proppably happend numerous times in a distanced passed when u ventured into a WW DF server or 2 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
________________________________________________

Quote:

Do you also play competitive sports with small children and "mop the floor with them" just because you're much older, bigger and you just can? The same kind of pathetic search for a total lack of challenge.

End Quote.
________________________________________________


Let me guess, u are using the latest Track IR but finds nothing wrong in shooting down people 7 out of 10 times that doesnt have this "perfectly eccepteble cheat tool". http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

rovens
04-18-2006, 01:27 PM
Well after saying earlier how i had real trouble using the Hat to manipulate the view with full cockpit on i spent my day teaching myslf to do it (offline). Now i think i will be flying like this all the time, maybe only using the no pit view for landing or taxiing till i pratice that a bit more.

Its also added and intresting aspect to the game as i found myself picking planes due to how good the visibility was. I had never had to do this before.

So im a convert http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Chuck_Older
04-18-2006, 01:36 PM
That's a good point! How can you pick a plane you like, if you don't know what it's really like? By How it flies? Well anyone can fly any of these planes given some practice, but where is the character of the plane without a cockpit? I really think that pit-off fliers are missing a huge part of what's going on, enjoyment-wise, by not seeing how these planes used to work

I don't think it's a secret that I really find no-pit to be against the premise of the simulation- aside from it's 'where is my orientation-reference' drawback

Something else to consider- on 'no-pit' I assume that your gyro is infallible- in other words, your artificial horizon never 'tumbles'. In a real aircraft, it would.

Another thought on pit vs. no-pit:

when the sims get sophisticated enough, how are you going to know that your manifold pressure is in the right range for take-off? How will you know a breaker has popped on your radio? How will you know you're losing oil pressure? How will you know it's time to change fuel tanks? With a dozen or more text messages blocking your view. Nope. You'll know-

-by looking at your cockpit http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

LilHorse
04-18-2006, 02:05 PM
Nope. Never. I don't even know what the command is. Don't care to know. Nope. Nuh-uh. Nah.

han freak solo
04-18-2006, 02:18 PM
View this, Sweetcakes.

http://www.lssdigital.com/lwpilot/woman_i_wonder.jpg

Capt.LoneRanger
04-18-2006, 02:26 PM
Indeed I got to confess I really use this view.

Infact I used this view excessively during the last few month. BF2-cockpits just look so ugly, I couldn't take it any longer.

Hey , what the heck? BF2 is the only game on earth where a plane flies smaller circles the faster the plane goes.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif Who cares about the wonder-woman view then?

Von_Rat
04-18-2006, 06:50 PM
Let me guess, u are using the latest Track IR but finds nothing wrong in shooting down people 7 out of 10 times that doesnt have this "perfectly eccepteble cheat tool".



track ir is a cheat tool..... wow now ive heard everything.

track ir doesn't do anything a mouse can't.
the only advantage it has over a mouse is it feels more natural to most people,not all, thats why i like it.

Bearcat99
04-18-2006, 06:56 PM
Originally posted by han freak solo:
View this, Sweetcakes.

http://www.lssdigital.com/lwpilot/woman_i_wonder.jpg

GGAAAACK!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Cajun76
04-18-2006, 08:32 PM
Originally posted by han freak solo:
View this, Sweetcakes.

http://www.lssdigital.com/lwpilot/woman_i_wonder.jpg

I'm glad she's doing well, even after dumping me and breaking my heart.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif

Seriously, you need to stop posting stuff like that han, we'll have folks swarming to Louisiana, stealing our women.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

Stigler_9_JG52
04-18-2006, 09:04 PM
Originally posted by BaronUnderpants:
Let me guess, u are using the latest Track IR but finds nothing wrong in shooting down people 7 out of 10 times that doesnt have this "perfectly accepteble cheat tool". http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Nope, wrong. Just an old fashioned hat switch. Don't use padlock either. FWIW, I don't look at TrackIR as a "cheat", it's technology, just like a mouse or even a hat switch. But, I just don't think it's NECESSARY, when a hat switch works just as well and doesn't cost hundreds of dollars extra.

WTE_Galway
04-18-2006, 09:21 PM
i tried it once years ago and got motion sickness .. seems pointless to me anyway .. why have a historical sim with spaceship controls

as for trackIr .. I find its main advantage is offline ground pounding, its not that big a deal in an online furball especially with icons enabled .. I suspect the people who call it a "cheat" are trying to explain away there own inadequate shooting and SA

AFJ_Locust
04-18-2006, 09:25 PM
Its only nessicary to check certain things, Like Skins or screenshots or airspeeds

AKA_TAGERT
04-18-2006, 09:55 PM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
Nope, wrong. Just an old fashioned hat switch. Don't use padlock either. FWIW, I don't look at TrackIR as a "cheat", it's technology, just like a mouse or even a hat switch. But, I just don't think it's NECESSARY, when a hat switch works just as well and doesn't cost hundreds of dollars extra. Not suprising coming from someone that does not understand the importants of imersion

TheGozr
04-18-2006, 10:42 PM
Stigler_9_JG52 you are scaring me .... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif

AFJ_Locust
04-18-2006, 11:13 PM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
a hat switch works just as well and doesn't cost hundreds of dollars extra.

Im still on HAT also worked well for 5 years why change now.

Id try TIR4 with 3dof if it worked in this sim then it would be worth it, plus I hate hats & dont wana stick a dot on my forhead LOL

AFJ_Locust
04-18-2006, 11:15 PM
Originally posted by WTE_Galway:
I suspect the people who call it a "cheat" are trying to explain away there own inadequate shooting and SA

Realy dont need tir for SA & GunAim, I agree tho TIR is not a cheat, some have it others dont

wayno7777
04-18-2006, 11:20 PM
Originally posted by TAW_Oilburner:
This may sound kinda stupid, but when I got IL-2 I didn't even know this view was available. I tried it about 6months ago and it's so disorienting I can't see how anybody uses it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
It used to screw me up in Fighter Ace also....

wayno7777
04-18-2006, 11:38 PM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
Consider a return to Crimson Skies and don't come back. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


I use the pit in CS and X-Wing also....

rnzoli
04-19-2006, 04:11 AM
Let me guess, u are using the latest Track IR but finds nothing wrong in shooting down people 7 out of 10 times that doesnt have this "perfectly eccepteble cheat tool".
Just remember that with the above logic, a simple joystick is also a "cheat tool" , when flying against someone using only the keyboard.

tHeBaLrOgRoCkS
04-19-2006, 06:32 AM
Originally posted by Cajun76:

Seriously, you need to stop posting stuff like that han, we'll have folks swarming to Louisiana, stealing our women.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

Nonsense !! With legs like that she is obviously British! Hands of our Hotties http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif

Irish_Rogues
04-19-2006, 06:45 AM
Originally posted by han freak solo:
View this, Sweetcakes.

http://www.lssdigital.com/lwpilot/woman_i_wonder.jpg

How did you get a picture of DIRTY-MAC on vacation in New Orleans? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Feathered_IV
04-19-2006, 07:21 AM
A question for the observant;

How many Volkswagens is she smuggling?

han freak solo
04-19-2006, 08:03 AM
Originally posted by Cajun76:
Seriously, you need to stop posting stuff like that han, we'll have folks swarming to Louisiana, stealing our women.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif We don't need to go to Louisiana to steal your women! My cajun woman moved to Texas 8 years ago. Plenty of cajuns to be had in Houston, be sure. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

mortoma
04-19-2006, 11:08 AM
Only time I have ever used it is offline in QMB or FMB, to test the TAS airspeed of various planes. Can't imagine fighting like that. Not very realistic and that's what I strive for.

Stigler_9_JG52
04-20-2006, 01:57 PM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
Nope, wrong. Just an old fashioned hat switch. Don't use padlock either. FWIW, I don't look at TrackIR as a "cheat", it's technology, just like a mouse or even a hat switch. But, I just don't think it's NECESSARY, when a hat switch works just as well and doesn't cost hundreds of dollars extra. Not suprising coming from someone that does not understand the importants of imersion </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

...and not a surprising comment by someone who can't spell "importance".

As for my not "understanding the importance (sic) of immersion"....got track? Or, said another way, what the h3ll are you talking about?

mynameisroland
04-20-2006, 03:34 PM
Originally posted by 96th_Nightshifter:
I fly in UKDed1 & 2, War Clouds, Spits V 109s and Winds of War - these servers are all different settings : "Wonder Woman" View, Pit on WITH externals, full switch but with name tags at close range to full switch with speed bar and I enjoying flying in all of them. I see no problem whatsoever in playing in a server that suits your mood - there is nothing inferior or superior about any of them IMO.

I feel no shame about flying in servers with Wonder Woman view, why would anyone feel shame about this? - it's ridiculous, no apologies needed for enjoying your game which you paid for and I agree with Xiola that some of the best virtual pilots I have ever seen can fly in Wonder Woman and Full switch servers and there skill shines through in both of them.

I'll also admit I prefer seeing the cockpit and it adds to the immersion but I mean really, its just a game (call it a simulation but it will ALWAYS be a game in the end), games are meant to be fun and if you can only get your kicks by flying in one type of setting then so be it - I prefer to have more options and enjoy this game to its fullest which means having a go at all the options and enjoy meeting the people that fly in these different servers.
The ONE thing that I think that EVERYONE would agree on is that Wonder Woman view is ruined by the dreaded F6 key - bring on BoB with the added track IR views.

So yes, I confess - I have and still do use Wonder Woman view from time to time and will feel no shame about it and neither should anyone else.

Hi Shifter and Xiola http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Im taking the same line as these two guys. Not only are some players I know who play mainly on WW servers better than any other IL2 pilolts I have flown against or with they are actually open minded and happy to fly on any sort of settings.

My personal opinion is in some ways it is tougher to get a kill in a Wonder Woman server. You cannot sneak up on your prey, and there are some excellent pilots who will make you work until you turn purple in order to score a kill. On Full switch servers evasion from an enemy is much simpler and in may ways more realsitic and in most cases you can simply run away in to clouds or dive down to some dodgy ground texture that matches your cammo.

It is on cocpit fixed externals on server settings that I play on at the moment and I like them a lot. I actually prefer full difficulty but dont wiish to sacrifice my flying time away from the server I belong to and the regulars I know. Worth pointing out from my own findings is that I actually down more enemy aircraft per hour full switch than I used to on Wonder Woman or I do on the current cockpit off Externals on settings. Sneaking up on people or entering a dogfight and clearing someones 6 when the bandit has tunnel vision is great fun.

As for the calibre of WW pilots, the last time UKD competed on Server Wars(when they had only one WW server up and running) they annihalated their opponents whose server was a full difficulty one. This for me rubbishes the argument that by flying full real you become inherantly better, the UKD guys were more mission focused and team orientated and this comes across in the maps in the cycle and the conduct of the majority of the regular players who fly there.

One Question I have over Full switch is how some aircraft have exceptional forward views like the Tempest then extremely poor rear vies like the Tempest http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Or to contrast the Corsair and the Fw 190 how did the Corsair end up with the best forward view in the game where as from what I read it wasnt that exceptional, certainly not compared to the Fw 190 or Hellcat.

Cockpit views are just another arena where your fave/least fave plane can be overmodelled or undermodelled and is in my opinion another area where 1C has used some clever 'game balancing' techniques.

Cheers

BelaLvgosi
04-20-2006, 03:56 PM
I've used it in offline campaigns when returning home with oil splattered on my 190F's windscreen. Only for the landing though.

brimigus
04-20-2006, 05:59 PM
Heck ya I use Wonder Woman.You gotta be kidding if you think the limited 2d cockpit with no periferal vision and no ability to lean forward somehow is more auathentic to real cockpit vision and view.Bold experiment get a toilet paper roll tape it over your left eye and patch the other,then stap your head to the head rest ot your car with a belt,start your car and head out on the highway.Oh and squirt some lemon juice in your eye to simulate server lag.That should simulate the same limited views you have with locked cockpit.Flying around in a cess 182 you have no problem seeing anything except whats directly above you.I would imagine a bubble canopy even beter.

BaronUnderpants
04-20-2006, 06:01 PM
Originally posted by rnzoli:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Let me guess, u are using the latest Track IR but finds nothing wrong in shooting down people 7 out of 10 times that doesnt have this "perfectly eccepteble cheat tool".
Just remember that with the above logic, a simple joystick is also a "cheat tool" , when flying against someone using only the keyboard. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What u talking about, isnt everybody using keyboard?? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

And some think WW is for loosers...i think Track IR is for cheaters http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

No seriosly, If some people think FR is the way to go, so be it, but keep thoose condecending and insulting wiews to your selfes. If someone really have such strong feelings towards a person/group using differant settings, that soemone needs to get rid of his pc and get a new hobbie....really, what differance does it make??

danjama
04-20-2006, 06:04 PM
Originally posted by brimigus:
Heck ya I use Wonder Woman.You gotta be kidding if you think the limited 2d cockpit with no periferal vision and no ability to lean forward somehow is more auathentic to real cockpit vision and view.

Yeah right, who are YOU kiddin? Yourself, thats who....

BaronUnderpants
04-20-2006, 06:06 PM
Originally posted by brimigus:
Heck ya I use Wonder Woman.You gotta be kidding if you think the limited 2d cockpit with no periferal vision and no ability to lean forward somehow is more auathentic to real cockpit vision and view.Bold experiment get a toilet paper roll tape it over your left eye and patch the other,then stap your head to the head rest ot your car with a belt,start your car and head out on the highway.Oh and squirt some lemon juice in your eye to simulate server lag.That should simulate the same limited views you have with locked cockpit.Flying around in a cess 182 you have no problem seeing anything except whats directly above you.I would imagine a bubble canopy even beter.


Real life has nothing to do with this, didnt u know? FR is harder ( as far as wiews go )therefore better and more emersive. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Stigler_9_JG52
04-20-2006, 10:23 PM
Originally posted by brimigus:
Heck ya I use Wonder Woman.You gotta be kidding if you think the limited 2d cockpit with no periferal vision and no ability to lean forward somehow is more auathentic to real cockpit vision and view.Bold experiment get a toilet paper roll tape it over your left eye and patch the other,then stap your head to the head rest ot your car with a belt,start your car and head out on the highway.Oh and squirt some lemon juice in your eye to simulate server lag.That should simulate the same limited views you have with locked cockpit.Flying around in a cess 182 you have no problem seeing anything except whats directly above you.I would imagine a bubble canopy even beter.

And somehow, this validates just "pretending" there's no engine and nose in front of you, no seat, pilot armor behind you, no fuselage around you, and no wings out the sides? How so?

Actually, both scenarios seem equally ludicrous.

I always find it funny how the "low fidelity folks", when they're singled out for their "convenient" and "self-serving" ways, always go to the far extreme scenarios, like "if you want realism, shoot yourself each time your virtual plane takes a bullet" and other such hogwash, in an effort to discredit the very idea of attempting to simulate realism... and then, go online and go to the other extreme, when it's convenient for them to make things unrealistically easy for themselves.

Von_Rat
04-20-2006, 11:18 PM
i wonder that when we get 6dof in bob, if more people will give up ww view. it seems one of their main objections to cockpit is no head movement, bob with 6dof should mostly eliminate this objection.

Cajun76
04-20-2006, 11:23 PM
Same goes for those who make it unrealistically hard, eh?

What about a fellow who builds (or even better, converts a warbird fuselage/pit), sets up 5 monitors, rudder pedals, long handled stick mod, buys an authentic flight suit and dedicates himselve to flying only one a/c out of over 200?

Do they now have the right to tell the rest of you that you're all arcady, low fidelity pansies who care nothing for accuracy and you've all taken the easy way out?

There's aspects of both pit on and pit off that are not accurate or realistic. For me, I still approach the sim/game the same way, because it's about how I choose to experience it, not just which view I use. Offline, I switch back and forth, because both have their strong, legitimate points.

Online, if everyone is flying pit off, it's still a level playing field..... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Stigler brings up a good point as well:


And somehow, this validates just "pretending" there's no engine and nose in front of you, no seat, pilot armor behind you, no fuselage around you, and no wings out the sides? How so?

There's the flip side of having to maneuver your virtual machine unrealistically to keep a bandit in sight when a real pilot would merely shift their head. To me, realistic flying, tactics and maneuvers have a greater priority than which view system I use, and the current "head nailed to the headrest" restricts this enough that I can accept the no pit solution.

If this option ruins the experience for you, fine. It doesn't for me, and that should be fine too. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

It dosen't matter too much to me how people view this, but I wanted to hopefully give voice to those who may feel they would be jeered at for how they sim, since this mostly seemed a pit off bashing thread. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Good luck and

Chuck_Older
04-21-2006, 09:26 AM
Originally posted by brimigus:
Heck ya I use Wonder Woman.You gotta be kidding if you think the limited 2d cockpit with no periferal vision and no ability to lean forward somehow is more auathentic to real cockpit vision and view.Bold experiment get a toilet paper roll tape it over your left eye and patch the other,then stap your head to the head rest ot your car with a belt,start your car and head out on the highway.Oh and squirt some lemon juice in your eye to simulate server lag.That should simulate the same limited views you have with locked cockpit.Flying around in a cess 182 you have no problem seeing anything except whats directly above you.I would imagine a bubble canopy even beter.

That's fine and good, but what if I want to see pesky instruments like my oil temperature or manifold pressure? Or look at an ammo counter or fuel gauge?

Every car racing sim I play (GT Legends, GTR, GPL) uses a "2D" (we both know it's rendered in as much 3D as a monitor can reproduce) cockpit as well. I have no trouble negotiating complex turn segments. I also disagree strongly that your "bold experiment" is anything more than an exaggeration

RCAF_Irish_403
04-21-2006, 09:48 AM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by brimigus:
Heck ya I use Wonder Woman.You gotta be kidding if you think the limited 2d cockpit with no periferal vision and no ability to lean forward somehow is more auathentic to real cockpit vision and view.Bold experiment get a toilet paper roll tape it over your left eye and patch the other,then stap your head to the head rest ot your car with a belt,start your car and head out on the highway.Oh and squirt some lemon juice in your eye to simulate server lag.That should simulate the same limited views you have with locked cockpit.Flying around in a cess 182 you have no problem seeing anything except whats directly above you.I would imagine a bubble canopy even beter.

And somehow, this validates just "pretending" there's no engine and nose in front of you, no seat, pilot armor behind you, no fuselage around you, and no wings out the sides? How so?

Actually, both scenarios seem equally ludicrous.

I always find it funny how the "low fidelity folks", when they're singled out for their "convenient" and "self-serving" ways, always go to the far extreme scenarios, like "if you want realism, shoot yourself each time your virtual plane takes a bullet" and other such hogwash, in an effort to discredit the very idea of attempting to simulate realism... and then, go online and go to the other extreme, when it's convenient for them to make things unrealistically easy for themselves. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Holy Cow, I'm agreeing with Stigler http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

MrMojok
04-21-2006, 10:03 AM
Also in those car racing sims, it very much helps to have "cockpit" on. It is difficult to 'feel' what the car is doing without it, at least for me.

Same could be said of the airplane cockpit in this game.

I do sometimes go cockpit off when flying offline campaigns, to get a good look at what the scenario designer has put on the ground. Also, in a vain attempt to teach myself lead for deflection shooting.

Worf101
04-21-2006, 11:05 AM
Originally posted by wayno7777:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
Consider a return to Crimson Skies and don't come back. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


I use the pit in CS and X-Wing also.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey, Leave "Crimson Skies" out of this. It's still on my HD and is sometimes a lot more fun than this sim. I enjoy it and always will. Sheesh folks to paraphrase Oscar Wilde "sometimes a game is just a game".

Da Worfster

Xiolablu3
04-21-2006, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by RCAF_Irish_403:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by brimigus:
Heck ya I use Wonder Woman.You gotta be kidding if you think the limited 2d cockpit with no periferal vision and no ability to lean forward somehow is more auathentic to real cockpit vision and view.Bold experiment get a toilet paper roll tape it over your left eye and patch the other,then stap your head to the head rest ot your car with a belt,start your car and head out on the highway.Oh and squirt some lemon juice in your eye to simulate server lag.That should simulate the same limited views you have with locked cockpit.Flying around in a cess 182 you have no problem seeing anything except whats directly above you.I would imagine a bubble canopy even beter.

And somehow, this validates just "pretending" there's no engine and nose in front of you, no seat, pilot armor behind you, no fuselage around you, and no wings out the sides? How so?

Actually, both scenarios seem equally ludicrous.

I always find it funny how the "low fidelity folks", when they're singled out for their "convenient" and "self-serving" ways, always go to the far extreme scenarios, like "if you want realism, shoot yourself each time your virtual plane takes a bullet" and other such hogwash, in an effort to discredit the very idea of attempting to simulate realism... and then, go online and go to the other extreme, when it's convenient for them to make things unrealistically easy for themselves. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Holy Cow, I'm agreeing with Stigler http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Even a stopped clock gives the right time twice a day http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

rnzoli
04-21-2006, 11:34 AM
Originally posted by BaronUnderpants:
seriosly, If some people think FR is the way to go, so be it, but keep thoose condecending and insulting wiews to your selfes.
May I draw your kind attention to the fact that such strongly worded opinions comes from both sides, not just the FR crowd, e.g., the "shoot yourself", "pour lemon jouce in your eyes".

By the way, I don't have TrackIR. I have Freelook. So I am not a cheater, right?! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Stigler_9_JG52
04-21-2006, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by Cajun76:
There's the flip side of having to maneuver your virtual machine unrealistically to keep a bandit in sight when a real pilot would merely shift their head. To me, realistic flying, tactics and maneuvers have a greater priority than which view system I use, and the current "head nailed to the headrest" restricts this enough that I can accept the no pit solution.

Well, it is sometimes necessary to bank the plane to see better. And often, if you're trying to track a bandit that's turning, you're going the same way as you need to bank to track him. So, even though our heads are somewhat "nailed to a post" in our virtual cockpit, you're not being asked to do anything supernatural or unreal to compensate for obstructions. on the other hand, having "Superman vision" through major structural parts that actually are there... well, now you can see why I have an issue. One is "arguably more limited than it is in real life" and the other is flat out impossible to do.

Chuck_Older
04-21-2006, 12:32 PM
One of the biggest problems with the cockpit is that we can't move our 'head', obviously

Removing the cockpit sems to eliminate this problem...however, NO real pilot could actually 'remove' the cockpit framing by moving his head. Even if for the most breif period, there was a time in which a cockpit canopy rail DID block his vision

It is very, very possible to learn to 'track' an enemy with your eye, and make succesful medium to long range defelction shots, with the cockpit on

It is very unrealistic to use the argument 'but the pilot could look around the obstructions' when what you're really doing is simply removing the obstructions, no 'looking around them. The canopy framing was still really there and still blocking part of the pilot's view

I want the players to play however they like, but please, don't argue that it's something like 'more realistic' to remove obstructions that no matter what, would still impair your vision during some part of the 'visual tracking' process of lining up the plane to fire

I don't like WW, but I don't mind if you play that way (even if I think you're missing out on a lot). What I disagree with are some of the arguments "justifying" WW

Stigler_9_JG52
04-21-2006, 03:34 PM
Going further, though, Chuck.... I DO mind if people are using this view, even in a server where I would have the option to do the same.

Why? It's the "under the nose" crossing shot. This was an incredibly hard thing to pull off, and only one pilot really had a talent for it, and that was H.J. Marseille. Even many good pilots could not accurately predict a shot with the enemy under his nose.

With WW View, this is not a factor. And, the tactics used to avoid head-on passes and to survive in tight scissors (to wit, getting to the enemy's "cold side" and hiding under his nose to foil a shot) are invalidated.

That's why so many people are such better marksmen in WW servers. They simply take away the visual challenges, and then use the argument that because everyone can do it, it's "fair and even". Well, it may be "even", but it's still totally unrealistic, and WRONG.

LStarosta
04-21-2006, 03:54 PM
There's cockpits in this game?

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Megile_
04-21-2006, 04:08 PM
Originally posted by LStarosta:
There's cockpits in this game?

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Its ok Starosta... you run in wonder woman view too..

carguy_
04-21-2006, 04:54 PM
Well to be true I don`t understand people who resign from cockpit view for reason other than fps.

I think ppl flying WW or externals have no passion for the game or just don`t want to get deeper "into it".
I can understand this fully,I also can`t and possible won`t go deeper into it because IMO spendin 150$ for a TrackIR is crazy.For me it is a thing that draws the line.I don`t spend more than 300$/year on PC upgrades nor will I spend more to enjoy a freakin game.So basicly I can be judged as a casual simmer without real passion.Naw,I have my keypad which I use nicely since day 70th of playing IL2 and I can even say I take pride from it,not needing to spend more cash.

Passion is for me viewing those beatiful,sometimes ugly cockpits,reading the instruments(as far as the resolution lets me).
One of my biggest arguments for pit on is all restrictions of a bad/good cockpit.
In a Me109 it`s mostly hide&seek(especially G6early and G2).I see little stuff,I have to roll,bank to see more.Finally in combat I am restricted to what my cockpit lets me see.
I cannot feel the cramped cockpit but I can have difficulties with tracing a bandit in a DF because canopy framing is bad.I fully accept those restrictions and can`t do without them.
Like in a P51/Yak I can enjoy 90% all around great view giving me better combat possibilities because of extended SA.
One of the reasons I will never like Do335.Thing is like a 60ft Aussie truck - completely on rear visibility.

Why some ppl who actually play this game never use cockpit? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif
So you think it`s another Xwing game?Not fair being restricted by your plane`s cockpit?Not good reading speed/alt/fuel/hdg from something else than speedbar?

You bought the game,you play it in your free time,it`s your business to have fun in your free time.Let`s not hide the cards though.Cockpit off is not realistic nor it is what real pilots had.Realistic in this case means more difficult but not necessarily on the other way around.


Man I just love landing with oil splattered all over the windshield. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Jatro13th
04-21-2006, 05:31 PM
I've never used it, not will I use it ever. The Cockpit-On option has taught me to 'smell' when the enemy will appear before my screen, or when he-she will shoot me, and I've managed to avoid being hit almost by instinct. And, boy, there is nothing better than the satisfaction when once in a while an enemy plane will brake or start smoking right in front of you when you took a completely blind shot!!!!

Now, what people do in WW servers is none of my business, since I never fly on them. It is their right to use it, since the game offers this possibility.

To tell you the truth, when I once tried at the beginning to see and feel the WW view, the only thing I felt was heavy dissorientation.

For me its not a matter of what's more realistic or not. It's just a matter of what gives you more pleasure. For me its Cockpit-On. For others it's WW. Plain as that.

brimigus
04-21-2006, 08:31 PM
I'll fly nothing but full switch or what ever you wanna call it as soon as this comes out.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7407662/
Till then look for me on UK decicated 1 cheating with my track ir , no cockpit on and external padlock enabled to find the bandit easier.

GR142-Pipper
04-21-2006, 11:25 PM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
Well, it is sometimes necessary to bank the plane to see better. And often, if you're trying to track a bandit that's turning, you're going the same way as you need to bank to track him. So, even though our heads are somewhat "nailed to a post" in our virtual cockpit, you're not being asked to do anything supernatural or unreal to compensate for obstructions. on the other hand, having "Superman vision" through major structural parts that actually are there... well, now you can see why I have an issue. One is "arguably more limited than it is in real life" and the other is flat out impossible to do. And the companion issue of padlock is yet another unfortunate gimmick of the game. It's the ficticious equivalent of not only a radar lock but also of a low grade AWACS. Like the WW view, these devices are only useful for situational awareness learning tools for those who are just being introduced to these matters.

I agree with Chuck_Older in that people should enjoy the game in any way they want. That said, the cockpit-on/no external view/no icons is truly the closest thing to a full real environment that this game provides as well as being the most difficult to compete in.

GR142-Pipper

gkll
04-22-2006, 12:06 AM
Ahh such an old comfortable topic, just like an old shoe... below just an old post, since pip has popped up with the smug certainties that so annoy many....

"To understand my point of view, you need to see that for activities in the game that I find boring and do not feel like learning (viewing, the button interface, turning my head ha ha... etc) I consider most realistic to be that option which is correct for difficulty. So when I look at icons no icons, or padlock no padlock, I interpret the realism as correct when it is about right for difficulty compared to RL. So this leads to the choices:

1. limited icons (could a real pilot see plane so and so at such and such a distance? When could such a plane be recognized? So that would be such and such an icon option... or dots that look so and so, I don't care - present dots are no good however)

2. padlock (Do I have to think about moving my head in RL? No? Can I follow a fast moving object without thought? Yes? Then why should it be difficult in the game....)

3. Pit on. (Can I see through the floorboards in a real plane? No? Then I think it is pit on gentlemen.... no brainer)

However when it comes to the aspects of the sim most important to me, I want Full Real. THis is no longer that which is most correct for difficulty, it is that which is as close as possible to the RL physics... so I discard the <difficulty correct=correct realism> formula. And what is most important to me is the machine, and the control of it, and the arena we compete in. It is rather like car racing, a RL pursuit.

So even though I can't feel the plane, or the g force, or the side slip, or any of the million sensory inputs that pilots fly with, and even though without this feedback flying the plane is going to be harder than RL, I still want the raw unadorned plane model. I want that FM correct to RL, I don't care at all if it is incorrect for difficulty, I'll sort it out thank you. But grind my way through sorting out how to move my head? And look at things? Not this lad.

Edit< and there's my version of 'Full Real, which for a hard-core simmer is where the Immersive part comes from. And some of the heat in these threads is because all simmers instinctively bristle if there is a suggestion they are less than Full Real, and will lash out when they are labelled 'arcade' that dirty insult.....>"

I agree however that padlock could be improved by limiting its effective distance to whatever limited icons distance is set, and disable in externals if they are on... however a very important aspect of padlock is that you can lock on to a bogey and 'zoom in' using gunsight view for a better look (remembering of course that gunsight is the 'real' view, just narrow FOV (another old shoe of a topic, right there...)).

I do generally agree that pit off is a bit over the top, and never use it... however it is not so absolutely straightforward as suggested by many IMO.

GR142-Pipper
04-22-2006, 03:33 AM
Originally posted by gkll:
Ahh such an old comfortable topic, just like an old shoe... below just an old post, since pip has popped up with the smug certainties that so annoy many.... There's no reason for anyone to be annoyed with anything that I said. People are free to use this game in any manner they like. My comments merely reflect the fact that there are certain gimmicks in this game that bare no semblence to anything available in real life, padlock and ww views being but two.

So just exactly what "smug certainties" are you referring to?

GR142-Pipper

Badsight.
04-22-2006, 03:49 AM
Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
So just exactly what "smug certainties" are you referring to?

GR142-Pipper your BS opinion of max difficulty equaling max realisim

locked pit with no icons moves away from most realistic than slightly relaxed settings allow

IRL you dont have a flat sub-2 foot 2D view window

IRL you dont have planes as invisible dots

IRL you dont have a fixed head position that only rotates

however , IRL your head may be stuck up your *** but isnt one point i personally would bring up or bother debating

rnzoli
04-22-2006, 06:34 AM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
locked pit with no icons moves away from most realistic than slightly relaxed settings allow


Highly debatable opinion as well. For example, why did a WW2 veteran immediately commented on icons in the sims, as "how nice it would have been to have them in real life"?

Because they considered it to be much greater aid than more realistic head movements, for example. Pit off and icons depart from the realistic challanges much more than the restrictions imposed by lack of G-sensing, narrow vision etc.

With such strong feelings here boiling about this idiot subject, I reserve the right to look down on anyone flying with relaxed settings, because I cope with more difficult challanges with less aid from the IL2 program http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

We can debate realism forever, but more difficult settings are indeed more difficult to cope with, period. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/crackwhip.gif

It's only a personal preference, if you easy the settings for yourself, you have all the rights to do so.

Xiolablu3
04-22-2006, 09:11 AM
Personally ,after much time spent on this sim recently, I have moved to full real and find it most enjoyable (If Winds Of War is full real?).

The fact that you have to identify targets before shooting is much more realistic than seeing icons blazoned on them whther they are friendly icons or not. Identification becomes a big part.

I still love flying on all servers, other settings require different strategies. I would say its harder to stay alive for an experienced pilot on the more relaxed settings and this is why they move to full real.

I think full real servers move the gap between beginner and veteran so much that the veterans are pretty overwhelming. I cerntainly feel a lot safer on Full real servers these days. (now that I have a bit of experience) Many veterans get so upset about the more relaxed settings because they cant handle being shot down by some newish guy, which is more likely to happen on the relaxed settings server.

I htink MyNameIsRolands post was spot on.

rnzoli
04-22-2006, 09:32 AM
I would say its harder to stay alive for an experienced pilot on the more relaxed settings and this is why they move to full real.
Not directly because of this, but indirectly you may be right. An experienced pilot can pull off more combat tricks, but the aids (relaxed settings) nullifies them. That's why you see a slow migration from easier settings to more difficult ones - the easy settings do NOT level the playing field as many claim it. Instead they favour the beginners big time. Once you get better at SA, ID-ing, tactics, the only way to use your extra knowledge is to go for servers of harder settings. Otherwise, no matter what you do, externals, padlock, icons etc. will thwart your attack and defence moves. It is exactly the harder settings, which level the playing field (the server) - everyone has to struggle with navigation, instrument checks, visual obstackles, etc., instead of just focusing on pulling the joystick and the trigger at the right time.

This doesn't say that all FR flyers are experts, and all easy flyers are nOObs, far from it. My safe bet is that FR flyers are better in a wider set of skills, while easy flyers may be better in aiming and manouvering. Different interests, different skills.

Chuck_Older
04-22-2006, 09:34 AM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
Going further, though, Chuck.... I DO mind if people are using this view, even in a server where I would have the option to do the same.

Why? It's the "under the nose" crossing shot. This was an incredibly hard thing to pull off, and only one pilot really had a talent for it, and that was H.J. Marseille. Even many good pilots could not accurately predict a shot with the enemy under his nose.

With WW View, this is not a factor. And, the tactics used to avoid head-on passes and to survive in tight scissors (to wit, getting to the enemy's "cold side" and hiding under his nose to foil a shot) are invalidated.

That's why so many people are such better marksmen in WW servers. They simply take away the visual challenges, and then use the argument that because everyone can do it, it's "fair and even". Well, it may be "even", but it's still totally unrealistic, and WRONG.

I also disagree with "even" or "fair" play, too. if I fly a plane that in reality had an advantage over yours, whose fault was that? mine? Yours? In an historical planeset, it was the Axis' and Allies' fault, and thus perfectly acceptable. I think you'd agree that historical pluses and minuses are by their nature something that skews so-called "balance" and is for me one of the draws for this type of game

I also would agree what the under the nose corssing shot becomes as easy (or as hard) as any other shot in WW, with the caveat that it is indeed possible in this sim to get proficient with this tyoe of marksmanship while flying cockpit on (if anyone disagrees with that, the trouble lies within the nearest mirror unfortnately. Not everyone can be expert at everything). I disagree strongly that WW is needed tp 'learn' or 'hone' gunnery, and I'd even go so far as to say that WW makes gunnery harder with cockpit 'on' because you never have to learn how to do it that way, and you get 'imprinted' like a baby duck. It's simply a crutch, a device that makes it easier. It doesn't make it possible in the first place.

Retrofit
04-22-2006, 09:43 AM
Originally posted by Warbird-:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Some guys shot me down from so far that I can´t believe they are not using the WW view.

Be sincere.

After receiving my Track IR 4, I'm totally confused in WW view. It's too disorienting without a cockpit.

Jatro13th
04-22-2006, 10:22 AM
Originaly posted by TAW_Oilburner:

This may sound kinda stupid, but when I got IL-2 I didn't even know this view was available. I tried it about 6months ago and it's so disorienting I can't see how anybody uses it.

Well, I'm glad someone else had exactly the same experience as I did!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

GR142-Pipper
04-22-2006, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
So just exactly what "smug certainties" are you referring to?

GR142-Pipper
your BS opinion of max difficulty equaling max realisim Max difficulty DOES equate to max realism as far as this game is concerned. To say otherwise simply shows you have very limited experience in this environment.


locked pit with no icons moves away from most realistic than slightly relaxed settings allow Sorry but that's complete baloney.


IRL you dont have a flat sub-2 foot 2D view window

IRL you dont have planes as invisible dots Spoken by the guy (you, Badsight) who has never flown a real engagement in his life. In real life when engagements are begun in many cases they DO begin as invisible dots. That's the whole purpose of conducting a "VID" (visual id).


IRL you dont have a fixed head position that only rotates So the game isn't perfect in this regard but nevertheless the "full real" settings are the most realistic (and demanding) in terms of what this game can offer.


however , IRL your head may be stuck up your *** but isnt one point i personally would bring up or bother debating Tell us again how relaxed settings are more realistic than full real. (snicker)

GR142-Pipper

carguy_
04-22-2006, 02:00 PM
Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
I disagree strongly that WW is needed tp 'learn' or 'hone' gunnery, and I'd even go so far as to say that WW makes gunnery harder with cockpit 'on' because you never have to learn how to do it that way, and you get 'imprinted' like a baby duck. It's simply a crutch, a device that makes it easier. It doesn't make it possible in the first place.


Yes,one of the reasons being complete ignorance of restrictions cockpit view puts on the pilot`s shooting.Under the nose shots are great example.WW pilots do this all the time I think.I did this succesfully not mre than 3 times.
One thing I learned for bypassing under the nose shooting neccesity is inverting my plane to see the plane climbing just below me and aiming accordingly.WW view pilots never learn this.

Stigler_9_JG52
04-22-2006, 03:07 PM
Just to add more fuel to the flames... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

I'm not a "full switch" guy; I believe that that particular setting makes things hardER than in real life, and hence is just as bad a simulation as "too easy"; it's just a different manifestation of poor simulation. That being said, if my choice is to fly either a full-switch hairshirt server, or descend into WW frivolity, I'll choose the former; I'd much sooner gripe over the overly difficult visuals and chalk it up to "bad weather" than to ever fly with people who can reduce their challenge at will, and are OK with doing so.

Because of limitations with monitors and our virtual visual representation, I believe icons are a necessary evil in eliminating some of the instances of "losing planes in plain view" that you get with alarming regularity flying in a "full switch" environment; they also ameliorate the sim's p*ss-poor approximation of spotting from altitude against the ground.

I think that a well-conceived icon setting, depsit the fact that it places letters and numbers on the screen, produces the most reasonable simulation of real life. By that I mean, the distance at which you can expect to spot cons if you're paying attention (and even if you're not), and the types of maneuvers you can engage in while NOT losing visual are supported much more so than the "flying with cataracts" effect of no-icon combat.

People often confuse certain "gimmicks" or "features" (like, say, TrackIR, or icons, meaning the long, over-detailed icons out to 10km) as "cheats" when actually, they create the best simulation, even though we know that objects in real life don't sprout icons. I always counter that they don't disapear in plain view as you get closer, either.

Chuck_Older
04-22-2006, 03:32 PM
Originally posted by carguy_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
I disagree strongly that WW is needed tp 'learn' or 'hone' gunnery, and I'd even go so far as to say that WW makes gunnery harder with cockpit 'on' because you never have to learn how to do it that way, and you get 'imprinted' like a baby duck. It's simply a crutch, a device that makes it easier. It doesn't make it possible in the first place.


Yes,one of the reasons being complete ignorance of restrictions cockpit view puts on the pilot`s shooting.Under the nose shots are great example.WW pilots do this all the time I think.I did this succesfully not mre than 3 times.
One thing I learned for bypassing under the nose shooting neccesity is inverting my plane to see the plane climbing just below me and aiming accordingly.WW view pilots never learn this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know what you mean...that I am ignorant of the restrictions the cockpit imparts?

No matter how much a real pilot can move his head, neck, torso, and body, or how far he could lean out of the window, he still couldn't penetrate the instrument panel, firewall, and engine with his eyesight. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here, but if this example of yours is to illustrate how the cockpit off view reflects what a real pilot could see, I have to say I disagree strongly

It seems that you feel that somehow, pilots were trained to do this type of shooting accurately. Well, not according to what I have read they weren't. In fact, nothing you can do while inside that cockpit can make he see under your nose aside from inverting the aircraft

It's well accepted that tail-dragger fighters were effectively blind to the front while taxiing...but somehow, that same range of obstructed vision "doesn't count" while the plane is airborne. I can't see the logic, or the point

gkll
04-22-2006, 04:06 PM
Hey there pip - cocky and arrogant are fine, I'm cocky and arrogant. In your posts, however, it comes off as, well, smug, and very 'certain'. Nothing is as black and white as you maintain, this 'view' thing is among those IMO. Thats all. Stig and Chuck and others seem to have a more nuanced view...

BaronUnderpants
04-22-2006, 04:39 PM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
Just to add more fuel to the flames... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

I'm not a "full switch" guy; I believe that that particular setting makes things hardER than in real life, and hence is just as bad a simulation as "too easy"; it's just a different manifestation of poor simulation. That being said, if my choice is to fly either a full-switch hairshirt server, or descend into WW frivolity, I'll choose the former; I'd much sooner gripe over the overly difficult visuals and chalk it up to "bad weather" than to ever fly with people who can reduce their challenge at will, and are OK with doing so.

Because of limitations with monitors and our virtual visual representation, I believe icons are a necessary evil in eliminating some of the instances of "losing planes in plain view" that you get with alarming regularity flying in a "full switch" environment; they also ameliorate the sim's p*ss-poor approximation of spotting from altitude against the ground.

I think that a well-conceived icon setting, depsit the fact that it places letters and numbers on the screen, produces the most reasonable simulation of real life. By that I mean, the distance at which you can expect to spot cons if you're paying attention (and even if you're not), and the types of maneuvers you can engage in while NOT losing visual are supported much more so than the "flying with cataracts" effect of no-icon combat.

People often confuse certain "gimmicks" or "features" (like, say, TrackIR, or icons, meaning the long, over-detailed icons out to 10km) as "cheats" when actually, they create the best simulation, even though we know that objects in real life don't sprout icons. I always counter that they don't disapear in plain view as you get closer, either.

Its very convinient that u and your FR mates deside whats closest to real and whats not.

WW is a abomanation but icons and padlock is just fine....how does that jive whit "Full Real"?

And yes i know u got well thought out and presented arguments for thoose little "tools" that suits your take on how a sim is supose to be used. And of course all thoose little "tools" clearly fall into the category "eccepteble"...something that helps getting the best experiance and immersion.

Real convinient.

Let me put it this way, some like flying arround for 30 min - 60 min between events looking for dots and some need more stimulation than that, plain and simple.

Badsight.
04-22-2006, 04:59 PM
Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
Max difficulty DOES equate to max realism as far as this game is concerned. ok its a fact

because Pipper believes it , it must be true

just like Bf-109's dont black-out as eaisly as anything he flys

Badsight.
04-22-2006, 05:03 PM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
I believe that that particular setting makes things harder than in real life, and hence is just as bad a simulation as "too easy". something that Pipper cannot get

max settings is just max difficulty , guys who like max difficulty have their head up their behinds about it being the most realistic as well . so so WRONG

Xiolablu3
04-22-2006, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
Because of limitations with monitors and our virtual visual representation, I believe icons are a necessary evil in eliminating some of the instances of "losing planes in plain view" that you get with alarming regularity flying in a "full switch" environment; they also ameliorate the sim's p*ss-poor approximation of spotting from altitude against the ground.

.

Only noobs use icons and fly on icon servers.

WOuld have been a lot more easy in WW2 if every friendly had a big icon on it. People making excuses about monitors/graphics and such for this 'arcadish icon noob crowd' just dont have the skill to identify planes like
the good pilots do.

Anyone who uses this 'crutch' is just kidding themselves. Pah, noobs and stuff. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

I only fly Winds of War these days, full real with no icons, its SO much more realistic to have to identify your target first.

danjama
04-22-2006, 08:39 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Only noobs use icons and fly on icon servers.


You feelin ok Xi? Never known u to be this narrow minded.

I prefer icons, am i a noob? No. I just hate chasing a bogey for 20 miles on the deck only to find out its a friendly plane, and i couldnt ID him caus there werent even a nametag. Im really surprised at u Xi.

Xiolablu3
04-22-2006, 08:46 PM
Yeah sorry matye, but these damn icon noobs just get on my nerves.

You have to admit that its just a crutch for the weaker pilots who cant handle the full settings.

danjama
04-22-2006, 08:58 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Yeah sorry matye, but these damn icon noobs just get on my nerves.

You have to admit that its just a crutch for the weaker pilots who cant handle the full settings.

Sorry but i have to disagree. I like limited friendly icons myself. I DO agree that full icons are too easy, but i think that some icons are necessary because it is very difficult and time consuming to ID planes in game. pixels limit our ability to do so, so a friendly icon makes the job that much easier, perhaps more comparable to RL.

Calling people noobs because they like icons aint really necessary, icons are much less "noobish" than using wonder woman.

edit: ok got PM http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Xiolablu3
04-22-2006, 09:07 PM
I guess we will just have to agree to disagree, mate.

Icons rank right up there for people who dont like full immersion and just cant handle 'full real'.

Everyone knows icon users are 60% noobish, and wonderwoman users 70% noobish. So on the scale of noobishness, wonderwoman is only just worse than nooby icons.

GR142-Pipper
04-22-2006, 11:26 PM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
I believe that that particular setting makes things harder than in real life, and hence is just as bad a simulation as "too easy".
something that Pipper cannot get

max settings is just max difficulty , guys who like max difficulty have their head up their behinds about it being the most realistic as well . so so WRONG If you're uncompetitive with these settings or simply don't like them, fine. Fly what you enjoy. But that doesn't change the straight-up fact that in real life there are no icons, no padlock, no external views, no WW settings...and that's exactly what full real servers offer.

GR142-Pipper

GR142-Pipper
04-22-2006, 11:41 PM
Originally posted by gkll:
Hey there pip - cocky and arrogant are fine, I'm cocky and arrogant. In your posts, however, it comes off as, well, smug, and very 'certain'. Nothing is as black and white as you maintain, this 'view' thing is among those IMO. Thats all. Stig and Chuck and others seem to have a more nuanced view... Gimmicks like padlock, external views, WW views, icons, etc. don't exist in real life so what's the point in maintaining a nuanced view about things that don't exist outside of the confines of this game? If people enjoy flying with these features on, fine by me. But it should be recognized that use of these features strays from reality. To some it matters, to others it doesn't...and that's why there are servers out there for pretty much anyone's taste.

GR142-Pipper

gkll
04-23-2006, 12:02 AM
Seems the debate is really between those who are in favor of function over form compared to those who like form over function. You got all this low flying stuff happening on full switch servers, not very real but works well... so <bad> function but oh what marvelous form... no hideous floating icons... so the function is off but the form is oh so correct.... same people probably put their money into a superclean for the 4X4 instead of a skidplate... "gotta look nice"... ill take the skidplate thanks.

Von_Rat
04-23-2006, 12:34 AM
Originally posted by gkll:
Seems the debate is really between those who are in favor of function over form compared to those who like form over function. You got all this low flying stuff happening on full switch servers, not very real but works well... so <bad> function but oh what marvelous form... no hideous floating icons... so the function is off but the form is oh so correct.... same people probably put their money into a superclean for the 4X4 instead of a skidplate... "gotta look nice"... ill take the skidplate thanks.


good point.

i find that on full real servers that most of the fights are tnb fests on the deck. just like the ww servers. my guess this is because most people can't id planes good enough to bnz. i know i cant, my old eyes are bad.

on LIMITED icon no ww or externals etc, servers i find alot more hi alt bnz going on than i find on full real servers.

rnzoli
04-23-2006, 12:45 AM
Originally posted by gkll:
You got all this low flying stuff happening on full switch servers, not very real
You seem to forget that without the aids of relaxed setting (especially icons, and map icons), only a good ground-based mission objective can provide a reliable meeting point on the map. In that case, low flying for ground attack and defense is quite natural.

rnzoli
04-23-2006, 12:48 AM
Originally posted by danjama:
I just hate chasing a bogey for 20 miles on the deck only to find out its a friendly plane.
Just to state the context: in this case, the use of icons makes up for the lack of radio communications between you and your teammates.

rnzoli
04-23-2006, 12:53 AM
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
my guess this is because most people can't id planes good enough to bnz. i know i cant, my old eyes are bad.
Yes, it is a pain in the butt when the first pass is wasted with ID-in the target. However, sometimes AAA can ID the plane in advance, but that only happens under 2000 m as well, so that may explain why I only saw medium-to-low level B&Z attacks on my server.

GR142-Pipper
04-23-2006, 01:49 AM
Originally posted by rnzoli:
Yes, it is a pain in the butt when the first pass is wasted with ID-in the target. Except when the would-be target turns out to be a friendly.

GR142-Pipper

rnzoli
04-23-2006, 09:01 AM
No Pipper, in that case the pass is also wasted. I mean there is no point in making a pass over a friendly in the first place, so it's wasted anyway (yes, still better than TK-ing, but the pass was a waste for sure)

I am seriously thinking about changing my little DF server to something like a dedicated coop server, because many problems we try to solve with icons and minimap are actually originate from the context of how we play the game. In a DF server, where everyone comes in whenever he wants and wanders about lone-wolfing here an there across a map without any control or communications, so it is darn difficult to re-create the true war scenarios, in which you could at least know with some certainty, where you friendly flights are. Within the constraints of a coop mission, it is possible to brief the players where they should expect the enemy and friendly on the map, so they can positively dive and fire on the first pass immediately.

F0_Dark_P
04-23-2006, 09:32 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
If the server allows it of course I turn it to WW view. No point in giving yourself a complete disadvantage.

I do however, prefer full cockpit servers.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
i dont chose to play with WW when i play online, but i will use it if the server i am on uses it, no point in giving yourself a complete disadvantage as Xiolablu3 says.

but i rather play "full switch"

LStarosta
04-23-2006, 09:51 AM
WTF Pipper so you don't see weird letters and numbers next to moving objects IRL?


http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Stigler_9_JG52
04-23-2006, 09:51 AM
Originally posted by BaronUnderpants (but with spelling cleaned up a bit):

Its very convenient that you and your FR mates decide what's closest to real and what's not.

WW is a abomination but icons and padlock is just fine....how does that jibe with "Full Real"?

And yes I know you got well thought out and presented arguments for thoose little "tools" that suits your take on how a sim is supposed to be used. And of course all those little "tools" clearly fall into the category "accepteble"...something that helps getting the best experience and immersion.

Real convinient.

Let me put it this way, some like flying around for 30 min - 60 min between events looking for dots and some need more stimulation than that, plain and simple.

That's the salient point, Underpants...the settings I gravitate towards are not based on convenience and whether I 'like' them...it's based on what creates the most realistic environment (which is in contrast to "easiest" or "hardest" environment).

And yes, I do have factual, historical and anecdotal "backup" to support the settings I feel result in the most realistic environment. Much easier to defend than simply "What I prefer", which is the crux of the "low fi gamer" element's argument. Which do you think is more valid, an opinion based on a whim, a mood, feelings, or "what gets me more points" or "what results in the maximum action per hour"... or based on history, fact, physics etc.?

Icons are the best example of this by far. While I will never say with a straight face that icons exist in real life, I will say that when you use a good icon system, the action that ensues hews MUCH closer to history and real life first-person accounts: the ranges at which you can spot, the ability to track (or lose track) in a fight, the ability to manage multiple bogies, etc...even the ability to bounce (yes, one CAN suprise opponents with icons; I do this all the time). That's the difference between "simulation" and "recreation"; the icon effect produces a better effect on the PC monitor, despite the fact that it uses an "unrealistic" device to provide that effect. The better literal recreation (no icon) fails utterly to produce the same effect, and introduces some really poor results and effects that fly in the face of historical fact (the chief example being the ability to spot from altitude against the terrain, and use that altitude as a great tactical advantage)

As for padlock, I'm laissez faire about it, because it has a LOT of basis in reality; with the one exception of the "stab the key and hope your view slews to something" radar cheat that you can get with it. Provided you must first establish the visibility yourself, padlock doesn't really provide anything Track IR can't. It is pretty "natural" to be able to follow an object your eyes lock onto. The downside of course, is that you forego all your SA besides the one bogie, which is not smart in combat. That is reason #1 why I don't use (or need) padlock...but if the other guy wants to get fixated on one con, while I drop in behind him and blast him, he's welcome to it.

As for your last comment, a stellar example of why you "just don't get it". It's not about YOUR need for stimulation, or your convenience, or your "gaming mood". It's about simulating the conditions that prevailed in WWII, end of story. How you go about "getting your stimulation" is totally up to you. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Fact is and was, if you decide to get some altitude and increase your options, your SA and your survivability, you should be able to spot cons with regularity, provided you're methodically looking for them. With icons you can do this. Without, in full switch fashion, you likely can't.

Xiolablu3
04-23-2006, 11:13 AM
Of course you can spot planes, but you may miss some just like real pilots who flew right past enemies and didnt even notice them.

You cannot seriously suggest that friendly/any icons is anything like real.

REAL pilots had to identify targets in poor visibilty, BEFORE they shot. They couldnt simply say 'Hey thats got no friendly icon, FIRE' which you can do on a noobish icon server.

Icons are just a crutch for the lesser pilots who dont take the simulation seriously. As a real WW2 pilot said about the icons in game. 'Haha, how much easier it would be if we had those (icons) in real life!'

You are trying to argue that the settings you prefer are more 'real', when there is absolutely no question that icons is so unrealistic.

gkll
04-23-2006, 11:31 AM
If the planesets are not restricted to red and blue allies vs axis, can you do it without some kind of icon? Sometimes it is nice to let anyone fly anything, on either side... 25ib spit against 25ib spit, manno a manno... not very 'historic' but still a lot of fun. And there can be no whining about 'my plane is no good..." or what have you, take the same plane if it bothers you. Skill alone determines the outcome. We have a little server up every second weekend for a few hours, pit on with limited icons (and externals.... hangs his head...) and we get some takers for sure.

Anyway I posted a bit sharp here and there, really seems we should all relax and just exchange viewpoints instead of insulting one another (starting with myself).

S! all

gkll
04-23-2006, 11:53 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:


REAL pilots had to identify targets in poor visibilty, BEFORE they shot. They couldnt simply say 'Hey thats got no friendly icon, FIRE' which you can do on a noobish icon server.

.

If the ability to detect the 'dots' was raised to something closer to RL this would be OK? Just no icons (which functionally would do the same thing)? Or is it that the current full switch views are just right, no improvement possible? I have been on a few full switch servers and I had a canny thought, what if I just take a bucket of o'fuel, and then streak along at low level, top speed pretty much, and look for unsuspecting victims above me... it worked pretty well. Just saying... poor noobs above me never knew what hit them.... they probably had more skill than me I am sure (the skill level I believe takes a sig jump on full switch servers, better pilots...) however I am the invisible killing machine down there....

Just trying to point out that it seems rather as if you are arguing that we are 'just right', right now.... or <is> the 'function' of viewing under <both> icons and full switch not right (in different ways...)?

Bearcat99
04-23-2006, 12:11 PM
Originally posted by danjama:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Yeah sorry matye, but these damn icon noobs just get on my nerves.

You have to admit that its just a crutch for the weaker pilots who cant handle the full settings.

Sorry but i have to disagree. I like limited friendly icons myself. I DO agree that full icons are too easy, but i think that some icons are necessary because it is very difficult and time consuming to ID planes in game. pixels limit our ability to do so, so a friendly icon makes the job that much easier, perhaps more comparable to RL.

Calling people noobs because they like icons aint really necessary, icons are much less "noobish" than using wonder woman.

edit: ok got PM http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Im with you jama... Xi I could see this statement of yours (and all the others who think like you do on the subject) about an open pit with icons... yeah OK.... I can agree 100%.. That is Arcadia for sure... (But if thats what a person wants..... who am I to rag them about it?) but icons in a closed pit.... especially if they are limited icons.. instead of the default ones..... to call that a "noob crutch" and to turn up your nose at fliers who prefer that method is really the height of snobbery and pretentious BS... and it insults about 60% of the guys who fly online. There are all kinds of reasons why those settings work best for some and not for others.... A guy with a XP2500 and a 9800Pro on 768 of RAM and a 17" monitor is not going to be seeing the same thing as the guy with the 939 64 on a 7900 with 2Gs of RAM in the box....
It never ceases to amaze my how some people can be so elitist as to insult and put down people who dont do thihngs the same way they do. If the Full Immersive settings are your thing then by all means.... more power to you.. but why knock anyone else. That whole full real chest thumping thing is such BS anyway.... Immersion is in the eye of the beholder. Peripheral vision is not a factor in this sim..... niether is being able to look around in the same way... (Everyone doesnt have TIR.....) What with different rigs.... different lighting conditions.... skill sets, hardware ...different time factors.... a guy with a limited amount of time to fly online doesnt want to fly around for 10 or 15 minutes looking for dots in the sky.... or only to get bounced and issued a black screen chit by some unseen bandit. It may be fun for the bandit... and "real" and all that nonsense... but it isnt fun for the guy who only has one hour every few days or so to fly online.. and fun is why we do this. If a locked pit with no aids at all is your idea of fun... great.. have at it.... but if mine or others isnt then I/we dont deserve to be put down and insulted because we dont share that view.

As I said.... I think open pits with icons... map icons..... lessened flight settings.... in non practice servers is arcade.... but I would never turn up my nose at a guy who preferred those settings because he didnt like to fly like I do. Especially if he was a newcomer to the sim.... People turn up thier noses at new guys like they are scum or pansies or something.... and they are just new... some of them new to simming period..... and they shouldnt be treated like secomnd class citizens and labeled as "noobs" with all the conotations that go with that. Plus..... I know too many guys who have been flying sims for too long that I have a great deal of respect for..... and who, although they can and sometimes do fly in the Fully Immersive servers... prefer more relaxed servers.... like I do..... and I wouldnt even think of calling them names because of it.

rnzoli
04-23-2006, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by gkll:
Or is it that the current full switch views are just right, no improvement possible?
It is certainly not "right", because of the known limitations of FOV, resolution etc. But I am not sure how it could be improved in the game. I am happy that my 6600 GT gave me a higher resoution and better FPS, and some of my visibility problems seem to have gone.



Originally posted by gkll:
what if I just take a bucket of o'fuel, and then streak along at low level, top speed pretty much, and look for unsuspecting victims above me... it worked pretty well.
Yes, this works pretty well indeed, but only against those flying around 1000m or less. As you get higher, the terrain gets less detailed, and dots below start to stand out more visibly, and altitude advantage is something useful http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Sure I lose dots in the process, but I try to remember where I saw them last, and where were they heading - this is essential for picking them up again quickly, e.g., after an Immelman turn.


Originally posted by gkll:
Just saying... poor noobs above me never knew what hit them.... they probably had more skill than me I am sure (the skill level I believe takes a sig jump on full switch servers, better pilots...)
Not sure they were experienced, because many beginners start on FD servers, having a longer life expectancy, especially if they get themselves lost somewhere on the map http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
I am not a good pilot, but I am proud that I haven't been shot down in surprise for a long while now - I always knew where my attacker came from. This took a lot of learning on how to scan the sky and the ground effectively (building a good SA).


Originally posted by gkll:
Just trying to point out that it seems rather as if you are arguing that we are 'just right', right now.... or <is> the 'function' of viewing under <both> icons and full switch not right (in different ways...)?
Probably both solutions depart from what is "right", but I see no technical middle way there on the software devs behalf, and I am certain that in a historical context, even limited icons pose less realistic challanges of ID-ing, than in real life.

rnzoli
04-23-2006, 12:30 PM
maybe it's a good moment to quote form the IL2 manual http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
page 40, "Realism settings" (sic)

Cockpit Always On: When this option is selected, you cannot make your cockpit invisible. Flying with an invisible cockpit is nice and easy because your field of vision is clear. In real life, this is practically impossible. This option is designed for those who enjoy full realism.

External Views: Some people think that taking a detached view of oneself is cheating because a real pilot has no such opportunity. This opinion is not universal, however. In Pacific Fighters, you can deselect this option, which naturally adds realism.

No Padlock: Padlock is a mode of vision in which the direction of your glance follows the chosen target. There has been a lot of discussion about the realism of such an approach; you can switch it off here if you want to.

No Icons: If this option is deselected, each object in the air bears a special icon. Icons make an object much more noticeable and indicate the nationality of the object by color. In addition, a special inscription on the icon indicates the type of aircraft and its distance from you. Strictly speaking, one cannot call it entirely unrealistic. Our ability to perceive our actual environment far surpasses our ability to perceive its virtual analogue in terms
of resolution and the field of vision, even if all other conditions are similar. However, in real life, there are no icons on targets, and you can deselect the option if you feel like it.


What are we fighting about? Everything is summarized nicely there: strictly speaking, none of the difficulty settings are entirely unrealistic http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif (yeah, some are more, some are less).

nearmiss
04-23-2006, 01:20 PM
You can't have a discussion about the HUD without someone bringing up the foo-paa about realism.

There is zip nadda about this sim that is realistic.

1. You can't even read the compass, navigation is a child's map toy thingy.

2. You have no peripheral vision

3. You can't move your head to the side leaning on the glass to look back.

4. I've never experienced a G force.

5. Situational awareness is a situation.

6. The screen we look at is like a porthole into the sim world.

----------------

Until Virtual reality goggles are released at a reasonable cost visual realism is non-existent.

If this were full real and your life depended upon it. You'd fly the HUD...and have every possible tool available to keep your yung butt alive.

So....why shouldn't "staying alive", mentalitiy be applied to the sim as is?

It may seem strange, but everytime I get hits on my aircraft and hear that Blam Blam it makes me nervous for some reason. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Stigler_9_JG52
04-23-2006, 05:41 PM
Originally posted by nearmiss:
You can't have a discussion about the HUD without someone bringing up the foo-paa about realism.

There is zip nadda about this sim that is realistic.

1. You can't even read the compass, navigation is a child's map toy thingy.

2. You have no peripheral vision

3. You can't move your head to the side leaning on the glass to look back.

4. I've never experienced a G force.

5. Situational awareness is a situation.

6. The screen we look at is like a porthole into the sim world.

----------------

Until Virtual reality goggles are released at a reasonable cost visual realism is non-existent.

If this were full real and your life depended upon it. You'd fly the HUD...and have every possible tool available to keep your yung butt alive.

So....why shouldn't "staying alive", mentalitiy be applied to the sim as is?

It may seem strange, but everytime I get hits on my aircraft and hear that Blam Blam it makes me nervous for some reason. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Although I agree that "little is realistic about this sim", I don't agree with most of the reasons you state. The reason the sim isn't realistic is because of the poor modeling, and the way visuals (THE most important factor in most combats) are handled, such that alt is a disadvantage.

However..

1. I have no problems reading the compasses in the planes I fly, and for cases where it's not easy, the speed bar fills in nicely (and it's an OK "simulation" as it's glanceable, just as the compass is in any aircraft a pilot is "checked out in".

2. Although you don't have peripheral vision and the sense of "barely" seeing things at the edges, you get the option for wide fields of view...and if you learn to use a hat switch, or use TrackIR, you can see just fine.

3. I find the rear quadrant views for most planes to be fair, with a few exceptions. One thing some people fail to take into account is that the majority of pilots were rather tightly strapped in, and couldn't easily get the view you describe anyway. The way to see your six is to checkturn, or trust your wingman, as almost all planes up to the very end had restricted to poor rear views.

4. Can't argue with this one...but nothing can ever really be done about it.

5. Huh?

6. I don't agree with this at all. I feel that, provided you know how to use them well, the views are fair. Not perfect, no, but a very reasonable facsimile.

Xiolablu3
04-23-2006, 06:01 PM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:


The reason the sim isn't realistic is because of the poor modeling, and the way visuals (THE most important factor in most combats) are handled, such that alt is a disadvantage.

.

Are you playing the same game as the rest of us??!?

I need to know how you know so much more about WW2 fighters in battle than A)WW2 pilots, B)WW2 reports C)Aeronautical Engineers

Have you flown 109's and SPits in battle? You talk as if you have, and are qualified to say this, when in fact I doubt very much that you are.

Anyone with half a brain knows that its tough to spot another plane who is down low and you are up high. Clouds, rain, the camo, the way the plane blends into the ground. These things make it tough to see a small fighter plane from above.

When you are down low and looking up against a blue sky, its much easier to see a plane.

This is reality, not some conspiracy of the game. Learn to use your eyes better.

Anyway, didnt you give up this game a while back? How do you know what happens on full real servers?

danjama
04-23-2006, 06:19 PM
I love Xiola's new attitude http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

carguy_
04-23-2006, 06:33 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Are you playing the same game as the rest of us??!?

I`m playing the same game as he.



Have you flown 109's and SPits in battle? You talk as if you have, and are qualified to say this, when in fact I doubt very much that you are.

About the visibility part this is irrelevant if he flew any of those.Anyone flying a friggin Cesna can tell the difference between IL2 and real visibility system.We have real living airlines pilots who took part in the vis realism deate.They said as if the very same person was speaking - spotting and IDing planes is easier and done from much greater distance than in IL2 series.No camo is going to deny this.The shape of a plane is clearly visible from up to 3,5km.
Once again I remind you that flying in IL2 is done in perfect or close to perfect weather conditions .



When you are down low and looking up against a blue sky, its much easier to see a plane.

This is where your logic fails to serve you.
Most WWII airplanes have blue/grey belly camo so why should they stand out so much in real life than a green camo plane that,according to you, can virtually blend into a forest?The blue/green camo has the very same point - make it as hard for lower flying planes to see the belly of higher flying planes.

In real life both camo patterns do not make planes blend into the background until a certain,far greater than in IL2, distance(separation) is gained.




This is reality, not some conspiracy of the game. Learn to use your eyes better.

Your reality based on your imagination because flying exparience,I dare to say,you do not have.

Spinnetti
04-23-2006, 07:02 PM
Originally posted by Jumoschwanz:
If you do not like getting shot down by WW pilots making unrealistic shots as they pull lead on your craft because nothing is blocking their view like it would be in real life, then just do not fly on WW servers.

Now on full-real servers, I know for a fact there are guys who can still make the same type of lead shots, but they are making them blind! Yes they have learned to make shots at planes that they cannot see, that are somewhere behind the nose of their plane.
So at least when you do get your a ss handed to you it is by someone who has earned it through many hours of practice at making great shots, and not some arcade kiddie who is spraying a garden hose at you.
One of the keys to being a real ace on full-real type servers online it developing the ability to make leading and deflection shots at planes that you cannot see at the time you pull the trigger. Developing this skill is a combination of wanting to, some natural ability, and many hours of practice. If you can visualize it, then go for it, you will do it!

Time to evolve, and switch to full-realistic settings.

Jumoschwanz

Not to sound snobby (I stink fighting online) I only fly full difficulty (except map icons) and in my trusty 190, you shoot blind a lot. Its really not that hard, and you would be surprised how quickly you can get used to cockpit only, limited ammo etc. When pulling a big lead, I pull up, do a short burst, then bob the nose down to see if I got a hit. Try it!

UberPickle
04-23-2006, 08:07 PM
I use WW when im analzying my preformance in tracks. It has helped me find the right convergence distances in different planes as well as helped me figure out when and where to shoot. It can be used as a handy tool, but for combat: HECK NO.

I'd rather play with my full realism settings off.

For example, when I am not playing in a campaign and I am honing my skills: Map and Plane Icons. They have no bearing on how hard a dogfight. But when it comes to playing for keeps: Full real.

You guys have to realize the benefits to using such silly options when and while training. I never start a campaign in a plane that I havent flown for two hours or more.

Xiolablu3
04-23-2006, 08:32 PM
Oooops, I am getting pms asking me whats wrong, I had better stop. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif (plus people who dont know me are in danger of taking the posts seriously) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Please be aware that the posts before were supposed to make a point, that YOUR settings are not necessarily the CORRECT ones to play the game with.

Play the game how you LIKE.

Stigler_9_JG52
04-23-2006, 08:47 PM
People who know their history are well aware that camoflage was much more effective in hiding planes that were on the ground and not moving, and were only marginally effective for masking flying aircraft unless they were extremely close to the ground (e.g., nap of earth). Why? It's motion. The human eye has excellent depth perception and can pick up moving planes very well against a terrain backdrop. It can also sense the difference between painted metal and foliage.

I had some experience with this just last week in an airliner. Yeah, sure, they were jets, and thus that explains the great(er) distance I could see them from (well over 8 - 10 miles, farther if they had contrails)... but it wasn't very hard. I recall picking out one small civilian plane heading in for a landing from (my guess) 15000 feet, just because I saw the airfield and just moved my eyes along the flight path, and...yep. That moving blip just jumped out at me. Just like a dedicated search of an area you know is likely to have enemy will usually uncover likely bogies.

Xialoblu railed:

I need to know how you know so much more about WW2 fighters in battle than A)WW2 pilots, B)WW2 reports C)Aeronautical Engineers

I don't. But I tend to rely on their writings and findings to form my opinion. If you've read as many first person accounts as I have, or if you've talked to real WW2 pilots, as I have, you might better understand my POV.

Xiolablu3
04-23-2006, 08:54 PM
Stigler_9_JG52 spouted:
But I tend to rely on their writings and findings to form my opinion.

Exactly. YOUR opinion. And just how much do you care about others opinons? Nadda, not a bit. You are so sure that you are correct over all others.

Anyway, the posts werent serious, but to make a point to people who assume their settings are 'correct'

Geez, didnt I sound like a real a*sho*e? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

gkll
04-23-2006, 10:48 PM
Hey Xi - I for one spotted the ruse, use of the word noob 5 or 6 times in your first post as the 'new Xi' was the giveaway, plus the reference to the pm... ha ha no harm no foul

Still you got some of us to post big long responses, good show....

You know I really find these debates quite interesting, honestly. Even when the concepts have been thrashed to death there is always a new snippet or two to consider... and there are a lot of people who are pretty hard case about their positions. Still in defense of ol Stig, there is a lot of logic to what he says (most of the time...), especially if viewed through the prism of 'how close is this to RL?'

Night all.

GR142-Pipper
04-23-2006, 11:24 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
...If a locked pit with no aids at all is your idea of fun... great.. have at it.... but if mine or others isnt then I/we dont deserve to be put down and insulted because we dont share that view. Agreed. I would suggest that you simply ignore the insults. If an individual prefers flying on any skill level server, they don't need anyone's permission or endorsement to do so and enjoy themselves.

With that out of the way, what I personally find interesting in this discussion are those who think that having even limited icons is more realistic than having none at all. That is simply not true. Icons (or padlock or external views) don't exist in real life. Period. In addition, I find it hard to believe in the year 2006 that people don't have adequate hardware to participate in a full real environment. The IL-2 series requires a higher standard of PC to even play the game and having 1024 by 768 resolution is not a very high bar at all these days. I'm more inclined to believe that people fly on the servers they prefer because of server settings preference rather than any hardware limitation.

...just my take.

GR142-Pipper

GR142-Pipper
04-23-2006, 11:45 PM
Originally posted by carguy_:
About the visibility part this is irrelevant if he flew any of those.Anyone flying a friggin Cesna can tell the difference between IL2 and real visibility system.We have real living airlines pilots who took part in the vis realism deate.They said as if the very same person was speaking - spotting and IDing planes is easier and done from much greater distance than in IL2 series.No camo is going to deny this.The shape of a plane is clearly visible from up to 3,5km. That's necessarily not true. Ask those who have flown against an F-5E, T-38 or F-16 when they're pointed directly at you how easy they are to ID. They're often not at all easy to even see let alone ID. The same would hold true for many of the WWII aircraft as well, particularly those equipped with in-line engines.

GR142-Pipper

Badsight.
04-24-2006, 12:13 AM
Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
Icons (or padlock or external views) don't exist in real life. Period. padlock is in the real world - you dont lose sight of planes IRL like you do in FB because your eyes track movement

icons are completely configurable - you dont have to put up with the full thing

what the anal retentive dont get is that full real isnt replicating realisim - its about making the game as hard as possible to play - not the most realistic

certian setting help get around view limitations & add not only immersion but also realisim , i prefer locked pit withouit icons myself - but i dont BS to myself or others about what it really is

GR142-Pipper
04-24-2006, 12:27 AM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
Icons (or padlock or external views) don't exist in real life. Period.
padlock is in the real world - you dont lose sight of planes IRL like you do in FB because your eyes track movement Badsight, read my lips...Contrary to what your Harry Potter flight manual says, there was no such thing as padlock as far as WWII is concerned. Today, however, instead of padlock it's called a radar lock or datalinked symbology on your scope via AWACS, the carrier's CIC or other participating datalink-capable vehicle.


icons are completely configurable - you dont have to put up with the full thing Once again, icons didn't exist in WWII.


what the anal retentive dont get is that full real isnt replicating realisim - its about making the game as hard as possible to play - not the most realistic Ah, so in your world Maddox just provided full real capabilities into the game so it would be "more difficult" instead of more real. And why would he do that, genius? Because he had nothing better to do than to concoct an extra level of difficulty beyond full real? Positively hilarious. Maybe Maddox should have named the forthcoming BoB product "Real Life...Plus an Extra Helping".
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

certian setting help get around view limitations & add not only immersion but also realisim Indeed and they're called no icons, no external views, no WW, no padlock, cockpit on, etc.

Don't change, baby...you're my favorite grape.http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:HLbxFwWGBjbtEM:www.tvdance.com/shop/-00-images/halloween-costumes/17896.jpg

Badsight.
04-24-2006, 12:43 AM
i just let you know how full of it you are is all Pipper - you can believe the Bf-109s dont blackout all you want - spouting off your BS in public is another matter

i can see your stuck on anal retention mode , & even if you could see how a monitor is a BS view device i still wouldnt care

btw pipper - guess what padlock is simulating

you either dont know or your too full of yourself to admit it

GR142-Pipper
04-24-2006, 12:48 AM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
btw pipper - guess what padlock is simulating That's easy...talent and ability.


you either dont know or your too full of yourself to admit it Badsight, just stay purple, baby. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:HLbxFwWGBjbtEM:www.tvdance.com/shop/-00-images/halloween-costumes/17896.jpg

Badsight.
04-24-2006, 12:57 AM
Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
That's easy...talent and ability. nope , but that kind of reply is why it shows that you dont get it

grapes come in different colours than purple , but someone who cant handel being shot down will always be full of BS pipper

RayBanJockey
04-24-2006, 01:04 AM
I love Wonderwoman View!

Perhaps it's because I fly like Superman?

Purists like myself prefer no-cockpit (because it's the purest form of flight). But that doesn't mean I don't like cockpit view. It's more like a 60/40 split.

You've got to master all settings in order to become a complete ace. Give me no-cockpit and unlimited ammo, and I'm good to go! (although you'll probably find me sneaking through the back door and carpet bombing your base from 20,000 feet)

There are skills that you learn from mastering no-cockpit, that you will simply never learn if you always fly with the cockpit. (shaking a bogey on your six with no-cockpit, extreme deflection shooting). Then when you go into the cockpit servers (good place to warm up before hitting the furballs) it's like you have a sixth sense.

GR142-Pipper
04-24-2006, 01:07 AM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
That's easy...talent and ability. nope , but that kind of reply is why it shows that you dont get it

grapes come in different colours than purple , but someone who cant handel being shot down will always be full of BS pipper </div></BLOCKQUOTE>You need to relax and take a break, Badsight. Take a swing by the fridge and have yourself some "grape" juice.
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:HLbxFwWGBjbtEM:www.tvdance.com/shop/-00-images/halloween-costumes/17896.jpg

Badsight.
04-24-2006, 01:11 AM
Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
You need to relax and take a break, Badsight. Take a swing by the fridge and have yourself some "grape" juice. nah , thats what you type as an excuse after you try landing when i just beat you in a DF - like your ingame whining , its both laughable & annoying at the same time

learn to take it like a man

& that seems to be the real RBJ , as opposed to RBJ's secondary login where he posts as his No1_Fan

GR142-Pipper
04-24-2006, 01:16 AM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
You need to relax and take a break, Badsight. Take a swing by the fridge and have yourself some "grape" juice. nah , thats what you type as an excuse after you try landing when i just beat you in a DF - </div></BLOCKQUOTE>You have entered another dimension, a dimension not only of sight and sound but of mind. A journey into a wondrous land of BadGrape's imagination. Next stop, the TwiGrape Zone!
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:HLbxFwWGBjbtEM:www.tvdance.com/shop/-00-images/halloween-costumes/17896.jpg

Badsight.
04-24-2006, 01:34 AM
is it the place where you play against the non-blackout Bf-109's ?

GR142-Pipper
04-24-2006, 01:45 AM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
is it the place where you play against the non-blackout Bf-109's ? Get some sleep, Badsight.

GR142-Pipper

Chuck_Older
04-24-2006, 09:47 AM
Originally posted by RayBanJockey:
I love Wonderwoman View!

Perhaps it's because I fly like Superman?

Purists like myself prefer no-cockpit (because it's the purest form of flight). But that doesn't mean I don't like cockpit view. It's more like a 60/40 split.

You've got to master all settings in order to become a complete ace. Give me no-cockpit and unlimited ammo, and I'm good to go! (although you'll probably find me sneaking through the back door and carpet bombing your base from 20,000 feet)

There are skills that you learn from mastering no-cockpit, that you will simply never learn if you always fly with the cockpit. (shaking a bogey on your six with no-cockpit, extreme deflection shooting). Then when you go into the cockpit servers (good place to warm up before hitting the furballs) it's like you have a sixth sense.


If only we could put cockpit on a slider

danjama
04-24-2006, 09:58 AM
Did nobody else notice that RBJ just posted or is it just me that sees his name http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

BTW i like green grapes best.

Low_Flyer_MkVb
04-24-2006, 10:06 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Jaws2002
04-24-2006, 10:06 AM
Originally posted by RayBanJockey:
I love Wonderwoman View!

Perhaps it's because I fly like Superman?

Purists like myself prefer no-cockpit (because it's the purest form of flight). But that doesn't mean I don't like cockpit view. It's more like a 60/40 split.

You've got to master all settings in order to become a complete ace. Give me no-cockpit and unlimited ammo, and I'm good to go! (although you'll probably find me sneaking through the back door and carpet bombing your base from 20,000 feet)

There are skills that you learn from mastering no-cockpit, that you will simply never learn if you always fly with the cockpit. (shaking a bogey on your six with no-cockpit, extreme deflection shooting). Then when you go into the cockpit servers (good place to warm up before hitting the furballs) it's like you have a sixth sense.

It's been a while. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
Nice to see you are still around. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

PS. Do you still have somewhere that fancy avatar? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

Xiolablu3
04-24-2006, 10:24 AM
Originally posted by RayBanJockey:
I love Wonderwoman View!

Perhaps it's because I fly like Superman?

Purists like myself prefer no-cockpit (because it's the purest form of flight). But that doesn't mean I don't like cockpit view. It's more like a 60/40 split.

You've got to master all settings in order to become a complete ace. Give me no-cockpit and unlimited ammo, and I'm good to go! (although you'll probably find me sneaking through the back door and carpet bombing your base from 20,000 feet)


There are skills that you learn from mastering no-cockpit, that you will simply never learn if you always fly with the cockpit. (shaking a bogey on your six with no-cockpit, extreme deflection shooting). Then when you go into the cockpit servers (good place to warm up before hitting the furballs) it's like you have a sixth sense.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Did this really just happen or did I imagine it??

Chuck_Older
04-24-2006, 10:35 AM
Originally posted by danjama:
Did nobody else notice that RBJ just posted or is it just me that sees his name http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

BTW i like green grapes best.

Yeah, mighta. Don't encourage him

danjama
04-24-2006, 10:39 AM
Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by danjama:
Did nobody else notice that RBJ just posted or is it just me that sees his name http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

BTW i like green grapes best.

Yeah, mighta. Don't encourage him </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ah comeon, everyone else is doing it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Stigler_9_JG52
04-24-2006, 10:51 AM
Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
what I personally find interesting in this discussion are those who think that having even limited icons is more realistic than having none at all. That is simply not true. Icons (or padlock or external views) don't exist in real life. Period.

That's an easy one to handle, pip.

These things don't happen in real life, either:

1) Our entire view is contained in an area no bigger than 21" diagonally
2) Objects, when we focus intently on them, tend to disappear rather than become clearer
3) Items disappear in plain view as we get nearer to them
4) Fast moving objects easily hide in surrounding terrain when there is a lot of separation between them and the background.

THAT is why icons are needed: because the tiny specks the human eye can make out (when viewing in space that is many feet in height, width and depth) are rendered invisible when displayed to scale or lower than scale on a 17", or 21" monitor, icons create a more realistic effect: 1) that you can spot the item, and 2) that you can continue to track it, even if you take your eyes off it for a scant second or two.

Also, as noted above, it's been shown that Oleg's "dots" and "specks" actually disappear rather than scale up if you zoom in (which is a reasonable simulation of 'looking intently' or 'paying rapt attention to an object'). This is totally backwards.

Icons are obviously not a LITERAL simulation, but a good one in creating the proper visual environment. When you use them (not the 10km billboard type, but shorter in distance and in conveyed information), the engagement possibilities created hew much closer to reality than the ridiculous results you get with "full switch" no icon... or with full-length icons, for that matter.

Also, the padlock effect most certainly DOES exist in real life. The only bad by-product of it that doesn't is the "stab the key" ablity to acquire something you yourself haven't seen yet, but just happens to be in the padlock cone when you hit the button. The rest of the effects of that feature are pretty spot on, including the fixation.

Jaws2002
04-24-2006, 11:04 AM
I play all settings, prefer lock pit but there is one thing about it that I can't handle for too long.
It puts too much strain on my eyes and I need them for day to day work. I just can't afford to force my eyes for too long looking for small grey dots (or disappearing small grey dots http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif) on a monitor for too long.

Because of this I end up flying easy settings more.



Originally posted by RayBanJockey:


There are skills that you learn from mastering no-cockpit, that you will simply never learn if you always fly with the cockpit. (shaking a bogey on your six with no-cockpit, extreme deflection shooting).



There is some true about this. I won't say you'll never learn some things but will take you a hell of a lot longer to learn them.

Xiolablu3
04-24-2006, 11:18 AM
I would say that no icons is the lesser evil if you want more realistic settings, its simply too easy with icons to think 'No icon has appeared, he must be an enemy. FIRE'. However much you try not to do this in the name of realism, you will always subconciously do this.

Plus I think that the ID part adds a lot to the game now that I am more experienced. It was far too hard before, having to ID a plane as well. But now its cool. You cant always be sure that its an enemy plane you are diving on and you cant fire until you recognise him for sure. (true to life)

You can ID planes form the wing shape at 1024x768 and yellow noses on 109s etc help a lot too. Spitfires wings are pretty easy to spot from far away. Its just a case of getting used to it, and once you do I can garuntee that its much more fun. Remember the other guy is in the same boat as you, its much easier to stay alive because he must ID you too. I dont have some uber system, in fact mine is quite old. FPS around 25-30, Geforece TI4600, only a hat switch to look around. So anyone even with an old system can do it. Sure you may shoot a friendly the odd time in panic/get shot by one, but this is what happened in real war.

I recommend you guys who are arguing for icons, but are pretty experienced, try out Winds of War server. Sure you will get shot down lots first (LOTS in my case), you will find it hard for a while. But it starts to be much more fun surprisingly quickly. I would not recommend it for the unexperienced people tho, adding the ID element is just too much if you are not totally comfortable with the game first.

But this is just my opinon and you possibly dont all agree. WHich is good http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

GR142-Pipper
04-24-2006, 12:50 PM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
what I personally find interesting in this discussion are those who think that having even limited icons is more realistic than having none at all. That is simply not true. Icons (or padlock or external views) don't exist in real life. Period.

That's an easy one to handle, pip.

These things don't happen in real life, either:

1) Our entire view is contained in an area no bigger than 21" diagonally
2) Objects, when we focus intently on them, tend to disappear rather than become clearer
3) Items disappear in plain view as we get nearer to them
4) Fast moving objects easily hide in surrounding terrain when there is a lot of separation between them and the background.

THAT is why icons are needed: because the tiny specks the human eye can make out (when viewing in space that is many feet in height, width and depth) are rendered invisible when displayed to scale or lower than scale on a 17", or 21" monitor, icons create a more realistic effect: 1) that you can spot the item, and 2) that you can continue to track it, even if you take your eyes off it for a scant second or two. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I can see why you might "want" icons on for those reasons but even in these cases it doesn't make it more realistic to have them. Anytime you have artificial queing aids in effect realism suffers. Perhaps we'll just have to agree to disagree on this point.


Also, the padlock effect most certainly DOES exist in real life. The only bad by-product of it that doesn't is the "stab the key" ablity to acquire something you yourself haven't seen yet, but just happens to be in the padlock cone when you hit the button. The rest of the effects of that feature are pretty spot on, including the fixation. Padlock is yet another artifical queing effect. In a WWII "straight visual" environment it simply didn't exist. The lack of icons and the inclusion of padlock remove responsibility of maintaining visual contract by pilot and allow it to be done/assisted by queing aids. Respectfully, I just don't see how this in any way can be construed as providing a more realistic environment. Again, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one too.

GR142-Pipper

Bearcat99
04-24-2006, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by RayBanJockey:
I love Wonderwoman View!



I'll be d@mned......

So it's been what..... @ 2 or 3 years?

BSS_Goat
04-24-2006, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RayBanJockey:
I love Wonderwoman View!



I'll be d@mned......

So it's been what..... @ 2 or 3 years? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>



I say ban him.

Stigler_9_JG52
04-24-2006, 04:58 PM
Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
I can see why you might "want" icons on for those reasons but even in these cases it doesn't make it more realistic to have them. Anytime you have artificial queing aids in effect realism suffers. Perhaps we'll just have to agree to disagree on this point.

Padlock is yet another artifical queing effect. In a WWII "straight visual" environment it simply didn't exist. The lack of icons and the inclusion of padlock remove responsibility of maintaining visual contract by pilot and allow it to be done/assisted by queing aids. Respectfully, I just don't see how this in any way can be construed as providing a more realistic environment. Again, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one too.

GR142-Pipper

No, we don't have to agree to disagree...I might convince you... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

As to padlock, this is a physiological fact. Think of how you can "see" and "keep track of" things without effort and sometimes without consciously looking AT it. When you're driving, or doing any hand-eye coordination task. Also, in real life we don't have to "push hat switches" to make our heads and eyes move, or even move our heads the way TrackIR requires us to. It happens naturally, without thought, almost automatically, just like having the program slew your view to follow the padlocked bandit. The padlock feature (again, MINUS the little radar cheat) is VERY realistic.

As for icons, this might be harder to convince you on, but I just have to say, you can't just look at the letters and numbers themselves and pass judgment based on that alone. It's a SIMULATION, not a RECREATION.

By the standards you are using now, it's "not realistic" to use a key command to do many of the things we do in a flight sim, like deploy flaps, activate gear, anything. We don't have to locate a accurately modeled switch in a real cockpit rendition and manipulate it... but the simulation is still good in the game, in that you still have to take a second or so to hit a joystick button, or press a key combo; this takes about the same time, effort and brain power (e.g., potential distraction) as to lean over and hit a switch in the real cockpit. Good simulation, but not literally "correct" or "realistic".

Icons are exactly the same, only in a purely visual sense. What you should ask yourself is, which "unrealism" would you rather have, a small collection of digits near an aircraft, or a completely silly but aesticially more "correct" display of "dots" and "specks" disappearing when you concentrate on them, disappearing as you get closer, disappearing seemingly for no reason? And, would you prefer that you cannot use altitude as an advantage, such as was the case in real life? Would you rather all the planes "in the weeds" have a SA and tactical advantage, when history tells you it was not the case?

Considering all that, icons are a logical choice, AND they're better simulation, given the technology we have to work with on our PCs and video monitors. Properly setup, they're not that much of a distraction, and they well simulate that innate ability to see, and track small fast moving objects without a lot of trouble (the maneuvering of the plane being the real wildcard in all this).

Don't think so literally. Think rather on the effect on how the game plays, and whether the overall result is more realistic. That's the key.

And going back to the original...it's the reason why WW View is so arcade. It takes too many liberties with the effects it creates (much better visuals than you'd have in a real aircraft, the ability to easily carry off shots you can't in real life, etc)

Xiolablu3
04-24-2006, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:

And going back to the original...it's the reason why WW View is so arcade. It takes too many liberties with the effects it creates (much better visuals than you'd have in a real aircraft, the ability to easily carry off shots you can't in real life, etc)

Precisely why I dont think you will ever convince someone to go back to icons when they have learned to fly without them, speaking from my experience, and probably the others who are pushing for full real here, I have the same view of icons now as you have of WW view, its just a step back from realism.

Icons take a whole part of realistic flying (and the fun of IDing a plane) away, in my opinon of course.

Ability to decide to fire before you have taken a proper look, able to spot planes even when they are camoflauged well, you will never miss a plane if it has a big icon over it, whereas pilots often didnt even notice their killer in real life. (Was it 80% of kills where surprises or somehting like that?)

Plus, and this is the biggest factor, it is simply much more FUN when you have to ID a plane first. (I am sure Pipper will agree here) It takes a whole element out of the game if you dont need to do this. I am sure it will be almost impossible to convince someone who has learned to fly without icons to prefer flying with them again. But as I said, you need to be experienced in the game first before you attempt to fly full real. Its simply too much to learn if you are not comforable already and you will be swamped.

Badsight.
04-24-2006, 07:25 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Precisely why I dont think you will ever convince someone to go back to icons when they have learned to fly without them. you have to be plain weird to fly one setting all the time

full real isnt - its just fully difficult

a dot hunt <~~~ yer , really realistic sounding inst it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Stigler_9_JG52
04-24-2006, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:

And going back to the original...it's the reason why WW View is so arcade. It takes too many liberties with the effects it creates (much better visuals than you'd have in a real aircraft, the ability to easily carry off shots you can't in real life, etc)

Precisely why I dont think you will ever convince someone to go back to icons when they have learned to fly without them, speaking from my experience, and probably the others who are pushing for full real here, I have the same view of icons now as you have of WW view, its just a step back from realism.

Icons take a whole part of realistic flying (and the fun of IDing a plane) away, in my opinon of course.

Ability to decide to fire before you have taken a proper look, able to spot planes even when they are camoflauged well, you will never miss a plane if it has a big icon over it, whereas pilots often didnt even notice their killer in real life. (Was it 80% of kills where surprises or somehting like that?)

Plus, and this is the biggest factor, it is simply much more FUN when you have to ID a plane first. (I am sure Pipper will agree here) It takes a whole element out of the game if you dont need to do this. I am sure it will be almost impossible to convince someone who has learned to fly without icons to prefer flying with them again. But as I said, you need to be experienced in the game first before you attempt to fly full real. Its simply too much to learn if you are not comforable already and you will be swamped. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, i actually agree with your idea here, Xio, but...

again, the graphics in the sim are simply not good enough for this. I have flown up to nearly ramming distance on planes, and been fully zoomed in, and at a 5:00 or 7:00 aspect, still could not see the types of identifiers that would be clear giveaways for IFF. Fuselage bands, crosses or roundels on wings, many of these clear markings display VERY UNRELIABLY in this graphic system.

As for surprise, I surprise people with cold bounces whether icons are in use or not. Fact is, it's usually inattentiveness on the part of the victim that is responsible for his not seeing his killer....and whether you have an icon or not, he won't see what he's not looking for in the first place. That "icons spoil the bounce" is one of the most common fallacious arguments against icon use. It's simply not true. It may be true for people whose idea of a bounce is a lead turn from a 2:00 or 10:00 merge, but that's not much for stealth, is it?

I still contend that icons are NOT a step back from realism, especially when you consider how incredibly important visual spotting and tracking are to any pre-radar air combat. "Full switch" no icon makes a huge mess of this, and produces action that flies in the face of some real life truisms, and invalidates historically proven tactics and theories. This truly qualifies as hardER than real life.

Xiolablu3
04-24-2006, 09:22 PM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Precisely why I dont think you will ever convince someone to go back to icons when they have learned to fly without them. you have to be plain weird to fly one setting all the time

full real isnt - its just fully difficult

a dot hunt <~~~ yer , really realistic sounding inst it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, what I put was badly written.

What I meant was that full real without icons actually becomes the most fun once you get used to it.

I still fly all settings of course, flew Ukded2 (pit on, externals and friendly icons) just today and then Winds of War after.

What I should have written is that I dont think you will persuade someone to PREFER icons after flying without them.

But thats actually just my view. Its only really dot spotting until you get close, I can usually tell whether the plane is allied or Axis as soon as it graduates from a dot now. I am wrong I would say 10% of the time. No custom skins on the server also helps the ID process. ALso colour of tracer when they fire. You just get used to it.

Stig, I can only think that you have something wrong on your comp if you cannot ID planes at that distance. I dont have planes disappearing at all. Maybe its a difference between ATI and NVidia? You are sure you have the latest drivers? If you do have you asked others what the best drivers for your card are?

GR142-Pipper
04-25-2006, 01:56 AM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
I can see why you might "want" icons on for those reasons but even in these cases it doesn't make it more realistic to have them. Anytime you have artificial queing aids in effect realism suffers. Perhaps we'll just have to agree to disagree on this point.

Padlock is yet another artifical queing effect. In a WWII "straight visual" environment it simply didn't exist. The lack of icons and the inclusion of padlock remove responsibility of maintaining visual contract by pilot and allow it to be done/assisted by queing aids. Respectfully, I just don't see how this in any way can be construed as providing a more realistic environment. Again, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one too.

GR142-Pipper


No, we don't have to agree to disagree...I might convince you... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Ok, I'll listen. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


As to padlock, this is a physiological fact. Think of how you can "see" and "keep track of" things without effort and sometimes without consciously looking AT it. When you're driving, or doing any hand-eye coordination task. Stig, that's just not the way it works in the real world in an engagement. You absolutely do not keep track of your opponent through peripheral vision. You're head is out of the cockpit and the fight is won or lost with direct visual acquisition/maintenance of the opposing aircraft. It's very intense and it's very conscious.
Also, in real life we don't have to "push hat switches" to make our heads and eyes move, or even move our heads the way TrackIR requires us to. It happens naturally, without thought, almost automatically, just like having the program slew your view to follow the padlocked bandit. The padlock feature (again, MINUS the little radar cheat) is VERY realistic. "Having the program slew your view to follow the padlocked bandit" is exactly what I'm talking about. With padlock, the PROGRAM does it. Without padlock, the pilot is responsible. At the end of the day, it takes a good deal of practice to be competitive on a full real server with the most difficult chore being the number 1 requirement of maintaining sight of your opponent(s).


As for icons, this might be harder to convince you on, but I just have to say, you can't just look at the letters and numbers themselves and pass judgment based on that alone. It's a SIMULATION, not a RECREATION. That's a distinction without a difference, IMHO. The whole purpose of a simulation is to recreate situations with as much realism as possible. If it fails to reach a certain threshold of realism it defaults to "game" status.


By the standards you are using now, it's "not realistic" to use a key command to do many of the things we do in a flight sim, like deploy flaps, activate gear, anything. We don't have to locate a accurately modeled switch in a real cockpit rendition and manipulate it... but the simulation is still good in the game, in that you still have to take a second or so to hit a joystick button, or press a key combo; this takes about the same time, effort and brain power (e.g., potential distraction) as to lean over and hit a switch in the real cockpit. Good simulation, but not literally "correct" or "realistic". That's a bit of a red herring and here's why. The use of a keyboard to accomplish these tasks (the raising or lowering of gear/flaps, etc.) really doesn't matter. The reason it doesn't matter is because there really is no pilot skill required to accomplish them. However, the maintenance of sight on an opponent is DIRECTLY tied to the pilot's abilities and skill...just as it is in real life. This is why use of artificial visual queing aids are unrealistic because they serve as substitutes for pilot skill. Your argument seems to present the proposition that each activity is somewhat equal (to wit: the maintenance of sight and the raising/lowering of landing gear). I don't really believe that you believe that but that's what the words of your presentation seem to convey.


Icons are exactly the same, only in a purely visual sense. What you should ask yourself is, which "unrealism" would you rather have, a small collection of digits near an aircraft, or a completely silly but aesticially more "correct" display of "dots" and "specks" disappearing when you concentrate on them, disappearing as you get closer, disappearing seemingly for no reason? And, would you prefer that you cannot use altitude as an advantage, such as was the case in real life? Would you rather all the planes "in the weeds" have a SA and tactical advantage, when history tells you it was not the case.

Considering all that, icons are a logical choice, AND they're better simulation, given the technology we have to work with on our PCs and video monitors. Properly setup, they're not that much of a distraction, and they well simulate that innate ability to see, and track small fast moving objects without a lot of trouble (the maneuvering of the plane being the real wildcard in all this). As you might expect, I don't accept your basic assumptions here. None of what you've stated negates the basic fact that at the end of the day, the pilot is responsible. It's on ME to maintain sight and not to rely on or be assisted by game gimmicks.

Don't think so literally. Think rather on the effect on how the game plays, and whether the overall result is more realistic. That's the key. The requirement to maintain sight is cut and dry. You either do it or you don't. What I enjoy about full real servers is the fact that this responsibility is on my shoulders which is what makes this game interesting. If folks want to fly on servers with any settings they like, that's fine by me as I have no interest in legislating what should be an enjoyable passtime for everyone. However, I see no reason to accept artificial visual queing aids as being in any way realistic. In my world they're just not.

And going back to the original...it's the reason why WW View is so arcade. It takes too many liberties with the effects it creates (much better visuals than you'd have in a real aircraft, the ability to easily carry off shots you can't in real life, etc) I agree with you that WW takes liberties that completely compromise reality.

In summary, I think the point where we part company is where artificial game aids are involved in areas which involve pilot skill.

I certainly applaud your efforts but I think on these matters we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I think what we can both agree on, however, is the fact that the game's certainly fun. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

GR142-Pipper

Stigler_9_JG52
04-25-2006, 11:48 AM
Pipper writes:


That [key commands simulating manipulating switches in a cockpit] is a distinction without a difference, IMHO. The whole purpose of a simulation is to recreate situations with as much realism as possible. If it fails to reach a certain threshold of realism it defaults to "game" status.


Nope. Consider blackout. You don't really lose consciousness in your computer den, do you? So, the effect really fails to simulate the phenomenon. But, with regards to the action, it does a pretty good job at creating the right effect (disorientation, inability to fight for several key seconds). You have to look at the OVERALL EFFECT ON THE ACTION to determine if a feature is good simulation or not. It's the same as if you get hit with a certain weapon. If it's a 7.7mm round and your wing flies off, I think we agree that's bad simulation. If it puts a neat hole in the plane, or perhaps jams a flight control, that's probably a better simulation. Again, the EFFECT the "feature" or "process" produces on the game action is the key, not necessarily the mechanism by which it is carried out.

Pipper also writes:
That [key commands simulating manipulating switches in a cockpit] is a bit of a red herring and here's why. The use of a keyboard to accomplish these tasks (the raising or lowering of gear/flaps, etc.) really doesn't matter. The reason it doesn't matter is because there really is no pilot skill required to accomplish them. However, the maintenance of sight on an opponent is DIRECTLY tied to the pilot's abilities and skill...just as it is in real life. This is why use of artificial visual queing aids are unrealistic because they serve as susubstitutes for pilot skill. Your argument seems to present the proposition that each activity is somewhat equal (to wit: the maintenance of sight and the raising/lowering of landing gear). I don't really believe that you believe that but that's what the words of your presentation seem to convey.

Sure it matters. In the crude example of landing gear, if you forget to stow it, you'll find it matters a LOT when you meet an enemy aircraft and the added drag makes your plane unmaneuverable. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif There's no skill required to "flip a switch" but there is pilot recognition that it needs to be flipped in the first place, and the effect this has on his concentration and overall situational awareness.

More subtle distinction: Consider the difference between a guy flying a FW190 with a automatic engine and mixture control, vs. a guy flying a LaGG or other more rudimentary plane who has to manage his prop pitch, mixture, cooling flaps, etc. all manually. And has to remember when and where to change it once he gets into a fight. Big difference in pilot workload. And if he decides not to manage it, his engine will overheat or he'll not have max engine power when he needs it most.

As for your viewpoint on the "naturalness" of vision with regards to maintaining sight, I think you're way wrong. The only wildcard in this regard is if G-forces are so strong that you can't easily move your head the small amounts it takes to keep a bogie in view. It does not take "pilot skill" to maintain a visual unless maneuvering is involved (in which case the padlock feature breaks, as it should). This happens naturally, and also is heightened bby the training a combat pilot receives (and it's fair to assume that in game, the player is assumed to at least be a trainied pilot with VERY good vision). I'd argue it takes some pilot skill to see a bogie in the first place... some were better at it than others. But all that is moot if the dot isn't visible in the first place, which is often the case with Oleg's "invisispecks" in a no-icon environment. (And yes, I think it is definitely a ATI-centric problem, but the sim ought to work with such a popular card and at such a standard res as 1024 x 768)

Anyway, I don't want to get too involved in defending padlock, because, although I think it is a viable simulation, it is also a bad crutch. Give me a hatswitch and my own thumb controlling my views any time.

rnzoli
04-25-2006, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
"Full switch" no icon makes a huge mess of this, and produces action that flies in the face of some real life truisms, and invalidates historically proven tactics and theories. This truly qualifies as hardER than real life.
Well, after reading AGAIN about real pilots trying to joining the flight of the enemy (see DIRTY-MAC's scans),I must ask this question:

Q. Did real pilots ID planes wrongly in WW2?
A: Yes, sometimes it happened.

Q: Do virtual pilots ID planes wrongly with icons on?
A: Never.

Q: Do virtual pilots ID planes wrongly without icons?
A: Yes, sometimes it happens.

So icons make ID'ing easier, much easier than real life. Without icons, it's about the same "mess" (confusion) as in real life.

Given that customs skins are not allowed and everyone uses the proper markings, I can identify the planes well. The most difficult of course, is on level flight, but then I try to fly under, not left or right, because I can see the national markings. However, in many cases, this obscure thing called situational awareness helps: tracer colors, AAA fire, engament type attacker or neutral. Another regular help is via radio: my mate tells me how many planes he can see in front of him, then I know where he is, and which plane is his attacker before diving down on it.

edit: I have nVidia, run 1280x1024 native res, auto AA and AF.

Von_Rat
04-25-2006, 04:47 PM
i would love to be able to fly no icons. i can't because of bad eyes. and im not the only one. almost everytime ive tried full real a friendly has shot me because he couldn't identify me either.

i like bnz but everytime i try on a fr server its seems its always a low alt tnb. my guess is because most others can't id good enough to bnz either.

warclouds has limited icons and theres hi alt bnz fights there all the time.

GR142-Pipper
04-25-2006, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by Stigler_9_JG52:
Pipper writes:
[QUOTE]That [key commands simulating manipulating switches in a cockpit] is a distinction without a difference, IMHO. The whole purpose of a simulation is to recreate situations with as much realism as possible. If it fails to reach a certain threshold of realism it defaults to "game" status.
Stig wrote:
Nope. Consider blackout. You don't really lose consciousness in your computer den, do you? So, the effect really fails to simulate the phenomenon. But, with regards to the action, it does a pretty good job at creating the right effect (disorientation, inability to fight for several key seconds). You have to look at the OVERALL EFFECT ON THE ACTION to determine if a feature is good simulation or not. It's the same as if you get hit with a certain weapon. If it's a 7.7mm round and your wing flies off, I think we agree that's bad simulation. If it puts a neat hole in the plane, or perhaps jams a flight control, that's probably a better simulation. Again, the EFFECT the "feature" or "process" produces on the game action is the key, not necessarily the mechanism by which it is carried out. The issues you describe above are outside those that are heavily influenced by individual pilot responsibility. Maintaining sight is one of those issues...and the most important one.


Pipper also writes: That [key commands simulating manipulating switches in a cockpit] is a bit of a red herring and here's why. The use of a keyboard to accomplish these tasks (the raising or lowering of gear/flaps, etc.) really doesn't matter. The reason it doesn't matter is because there really is no pilot skill required to accomplish them. However, the maintenance of sight on an opponent is DIRECTLY tied to the pilot's abilities and skill...just as it is in real life. This is why use of artificial visual queing aids are unrealistic because they serve as susubstitutes for pilot skill. Your argument seems to present the proposition that each activity is somewhat equal (to wit: the maintenance of sight and the raising/lowering of landing gear). I don't really believe that you believe that but that's what the words of your presentation seem to convey.


Stig writes: Sure it matters. In the crude example of landing gear, if you forget to stow it, you'll find it matters a LOT when you meet an enemy aircraft and the added drag makes your plane unmaneuverable. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif There's no skill required to "flip a switch" but there is pilot recognition that it needs to be flipped in the first place, and the effect this has on his concentration and overall situational awareness. That the gear itself has to be raised or lowered is near meaningless when weighing these matters against the requirement of maintaining sight in an engagement. Using your example, how many times do experienced pilots enter engagements with their landing gear down? Virtually never. How many times do pilots lose sight of their opponents? Often. The skill/responsibility requirement difference is obvious and stark.


Stig writes: More subtle distinction: Consider the difference between a guy flying a FW190 with a automatic engine and mixture control, vs. a guy flying a LaGG or other more rudimentary plane who has to manage his prop pitch, mixture, cooling flaps, etc. all manually. And has to remember when and where to change it once he gets into a fight. Big difference in pilot workload. And if he decides not to manage it, his engine will overheat or he'll not have max engine power when he needs it most. In real life, there is very little to manage. When entering an engagement, the prop goes to 100% pitch, mixture gets set (if it isn't already and the engine doesn't have fuel injection)...and the fight's on. Simple as that.


Stig writes: As for your viewpoint on the "naturalness" of vision with regards to maintaining sight, I think you're way wrong. I never said it was natural. I said it was not predicated on peripheral vision. Maintaining sight is an acquired skill that increases with practice and experience.
The only wildcard in this regard is if G-forces are so strong that you can't easily move your head the small amounts it takes to keep a bogie in view. It does not take "pilot skill" to maintain a visual unless maneuvering is involved (in which case the padlock feature breaks, as it should). This happens naturally, and also is heightened bby the training a combat pilot receives (and it's fair to assume that in game, the player is assumed to at least be a trainied pilot with VERY good vision). I'd argue it takes some pilot skill to see a bogie in the first place... some were better at it than others. But all that is moot if the dot isn't visible in the first place, which is often the case with Oleg's "invisispecks" in a no-icon environment. (And yes, I think it is definitely a ATI-centric problem, but the sim ought to work with such a popular card and at such a standard res as 1024 x 768) Our entire discussion assumes a maneuvering engagement which is why maintaining visual contact is both necessary and difficult. We're not at all talking about simply maintaining sight on a non-maneuvering opponent.


Anyway, I don't want to get too involved in defending padlock, because, although I think it is a viable simulation, it is also a bad crutch. Give me a hatswitch and my own thumb controlling my views any time. Me too.

GR142-Pipper