PDA

View Full Version : does anyone notice that the visibility range has been reduced?



HQ1
12-01-2004, 05:35 AM
Hi,all
Have you notice that after 3.02 fighter's max visible range reduce to 8km .In prevenient versions as I know from FB it is maximum visible range is about 12km.this means now pilot seeking area reduces one half.so the chance pilot found enemy plane even reduces considerably.I am not a real pilot so have no idea about if this is more real.another doubt is that most of people think that we got the decent visiblity to the plane from up high over ground now . but if it like this now i wonder no one would fly deep low anymore.everyone will fly as high as they can on online war from now.sorry for my bad english. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

HQ1
12-01-2004, 09:24 AM
It seems that nobody care about this. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

faustnik
12-01-2004, 09:38 AM
I care about it. My plane spotting ability has been reduced to about 12 feet in 3.02. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

WWMaxGunz
12-01-2004, 11:16 AM
LOL Faustnik!

I was able to spot LOD's below at a few 100m on the Oahu map with lighter background.
One thing I had forgotten was to change my dotrange which I set to load automatic in
the RCU file. I had the range as 3km but that don't affect LOD's or close range planes
with Romulan Cloaking Devices that only LOD-Spotting can break through the ECM jam.
For a while there I set the map icons on just trying to FIND a flight that I knew the
path of as I also forgot that icon text ranges were set to 100m and less. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

My bad. So I fixed that and still it's aerial version of submarine warfare. To avoid
being seen on my monitor, any plane just needs to dive-dive-dive and get over 500m
away where my LOD-sonar gets not enough return for me to find them unless VERY lucky,
they fly over something very light while I am looking right there.

Lining up for BnZ is going to depend entirely on what is below which 90+% of the time
does not promise good. Converginging with 200+ kph, 400-500m is not the range to allow
much correction before shooting. There needs to be able to see let alone spot from 2x
that far or more. I ask why was this possible as a practice in reality but should be
not so in a simulation? Answer is people retentive on pictures and minority cases do
not want a compromise PC to reality that works or maybe they have special hardware I
do not?

WWMaxGunz
12-01-2004, 11:19 AM
HQ1, have you checked your dotrange or even set it?
There are posts about setting the range 16 to 20 in 3.02 where 8 was good in 3.01.
Maybe 1C set the default to 8?

faustnik
12-01-2004, 11:50 AM
Neal,

We tested a bunch of dot settings last night. A few guys had better luck than others. Some, like myself, were flying blind.

What really bothers me is that this issue was resolved in 3.01 and it was possible to spot aircraft in a realistic manner. A few people complained that their "picture was not pretty anymore with the new dots" but, they did not look at the simple methods of resolving that. Now, we all might be stuck fighting invisible planes again.

So, I guess I'll have to lower my resolution and reduce terrain lighting to the point where the sim looks like cr4p in order to spot a target.

Do I sound bitter, sorry. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Ugly_Kid
12-01-2004, 12:33 PM
Particularly as part of the gamers are disadvantaged more than the others, depending on hardware. With 3.01 even ATI sers could spot. Is it time to say good bye to water and other eye candy and roll back to excellent?

CHDT
12-01-2004, 12:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>What really bothers me is that this issue was resolved in 3.01 and it was possible to spot aircraft in a realistic manner. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


The most important parameter of a realistic visiblity range, is that it allows approach tactics when seeing the enemy, what is much more interesting than close furballs with aircrafts visible at the last seconds.

And once again, at the risk of being boring, I've been long enough AA gunner to know that aircrafts in the sky or against a forest background are bigger and are more visible than in PF now.

HQ1
12-01-2004, 06:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
HQ1, have you checked your dotrange or even set it?
There are posts about setting the range 16 to 20 in 3.02 where 8 was good in 3.01.
Maybe 1C set the default to 8? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I have try it if set the dotrange the dot will change to the 3.01s style ,big fly http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif Do YOU think we can also tweak it on on line war?

Col.Kurtz
12-01-2004, 06:30 PM
Yes im blind too with the new Dots.
Sometime the Dots are OK when light and Map are not to dark.
Maddox Games should make something between the 3.01 and 3.02 Dots. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif
I think than many of the people that complained about the 3.01 Dots allready had **** Display settings to spot planes in version 3.00...
With the old 3.00 Dots i could at last follow moving targets,the dark dots now are most of the time completely camouflaged by terrain http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

WWMaxGunz
12-02-2004, 04:24 AM
Ugly Kid... Perfect/Excellent settings? Not on my hardware! Neither one till upgrades.

There is such a wide range of graphics options, will what works for either end or the
middle ever be good enough for the others? Could the dot style be tied to settings in
some way, overall?

Faustnik... I agree at least when it comes to anything much below the horizon. The SIZE
of the dots is not so much the issue maybe, there needs to be contrast between plane and
what is below and from all I know and study there should be more contrast as the plane
below is farther away from the ground below, the eyes see that way when scanning proper
in the real world.

Maybe dots should be drawn a color set after checking the pixel over which they draw...
could that be more time than when the plane is a whole load of poly's? I the answer is
it takes too long then hey, please the 3.01 white circles and dots.

HQ1... online, the SERVER or HOST makes the settings only.

CHDT... I read approach tactics of the one who spots first is to go around and come from
oblique or with the sun behind. I have NEVER read in any manual or book of just flying
up to less than a mile, you will be safe as long as you are below the target, with any
bit of luck he won't see you from right in front until you have begun to fire. With the
sim the way it is for me now, that would be a valid working tactic.

Faustnik, was it you who suggested an ATI 9200? I see them on Pricewatch, 128MB for $45.
But I got a "good deal" on my latest mobo, an ASUS A7V8X-X which is not ATI friendly.
There is a flash patch which I hesitate to try as I don't know how good it is and why
spend on a card that I may be able to use? Also I run 98SE so ATI drivers/PF/my mobo...
That is why I've been looking at ads for the GF5 128 FX's as upgrade from GF2 64 MX,
it seems a clear and easy path for the same basic $.

antifreeze
12-02-2004, 11:04 AM
No, an 8km dot is not the maximum distance. It is only the default distance (ie. the default DOT setting of 14km makes dots appear at about 8km).
Set your dot distance to 25km, and you will have quite clear dots against the sky at 12km in poor weather, fading-in nicely, becoming fully-formed aircraft at about 2km wide view (fully-formed at 4km zoomed view) at 1152x864 resolution and below.
You will probably see quite clear dots against the ground/sea at about 5-6km below you, and using zoomed view shows these as fully-formed aircraft at 4km below you.

Open console (shift-tab). Type 'mp_dotrange DOT 25'. If you want to check the distance that you can see the dots appear, set RANGE to 25 in the same way and toggle icons on.

LeadSpitter_
12-02-2004, 08:45 PM
yes and its great now, the big basketball dots were horable that you could not judge 8000m away or 1500m.

Give it a couple a days to adjust and the new dots they will seem bigger when you get use to them. Dont forget these dots now were used in many of the previous patches those huge basketball dots were a recent thing.

like everything half the people like and half the people dont like them. For me i did not like them and allowed no using the horizon to blend in nor judging of distance. The only downfall in small dots to me is the ground draw distance of ground objects which seem reduced as well i guess we cant have both.

If your older and need glasses i suggest building a fresnal lens which will help you out alot.

LEXX_Luthor
12-02-2004, 09:57 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif leadspitter you posted last week you liked 3.01 dots because servers would move away from text icon labels.

leadspitter:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>For me i did not like them and allowed no using the horizon to blend in nor judging of distance. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Try changing dotrange for 3.01 dots. Default dotrange too high (14km according to Tully) with 3.01 Patch. Then the 3.01 dots become smaller with range better, and then fade even farther away.

3.01 dotrange fix, czech it out...
-> http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=1751051542



leasdpittr:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>If your older and need glasses i suggest building a fresnal lens which will help you out alot. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
If you want to insult flight simmers at this webboard, you start with me.

LeadSpitter_
12-02-2004, 11:17 PM
it was a joke lexx i guess you didnt get it meaning its too easy to see

antifreeze
12-03-2004, 01:08 AM
I got caught out with the 3.01 dots. I also said that I liked them. With DOT distance reduced they looked acceptable at 1152x864. 'liked' and 'acceptable' being the operative words. I didn't like reducing the DOT parameter to gain a better fade-in effect, because beyond the DOT that is set, everything is invisible. I was under the impression that it was the best Oleg and team could do, so I thought 'ok'.

But I LOVE the 2.03 dots because the fade-in is perfect, allied and luftwaffe dots are the same size, zoom view actually zooms properly at 4km to render an aircraft rather than a smaller/similar dot, the gradual change from dot to aircraft graphic is perfect, AND we can see actually stuff 12km away by setting DOT to 25. Vertically dots can be seen fairly well (but not so you'd catch them 100% of the time) against the ground/sea at 5-6km, and at 4km using zoom view you can actually check what you see, because it renders an aircraft not just a dot.

The BnZoomers can still use their tactics easily, but it means they will actually have to look rather than have the target dangled in front of them like a carrot.

I'm convinced mp_dotrange has never been better.
In my view the only change needed is to make 25 the default DOT.