Jump to content

BS label distance ?


Weta43

Recommended Posts

There have been a lot of discussions about whether it’s more realistic to have labels on or not, and if so at what distance should things be visible, identifiable etc.

 

It seems to me that whichever side you land on, my guess is that the majority of people who buy the game:

1. Never come to these sites & discover that they can tailor the labels to their own preferences

2. Leave labels on permanently.

Now I fall into the ‘SA is so impaired in a PC based game that having some limited form of labels is more realistic & I’ve tailored them to suit’ camp (but I also fall into the ‘Labels are so ugly that most of the time I turn them off’ camp).

 

If you accept the ‘labels on is the default position’ argument for the purposes of this discussion (so we don’t have to have pages of OT argument about that), then before the release of BS is probably a good time to lobby ED about what the community thinks might be the most realistic settings for those labels, because it seems to me that the default configuration is just so too easy.

 

I’d suggest ED could have a label schema similar to that at present as a ‘full labels’ option, then have a more realistic intermediate position as ‘limited labels’, then off for those that are inclined that way… much like the ‘G’ effects we have now.

 

Before I add some suggested label settings for starters, there is one other thing that could do with changing about the labels in BS. Under LO the labels are a fixed number of pixels in size, so as the screen resolution goes down, the labels get bigger (& easier to see & Uglier). It would be a change for the better if the labels could somehow be a given size relative to the environment whatever the screen definition was set at…

 

My opinion – something like this:

 

For aircraft – have the point at which labels appear dependant on the airplane.

I hunted around on the internet & found a variety of distances quoted for the maximum distance that an airplane can be seen at.

These ranged down from the maximum I found where a pilot said he’d seen another aircraft at 40km (glint) to some people saying 6km was about it.

I live not far from an airport & suspect that if you knew where to look and conditions were good that probably about 15km is an optimistic but not totally incredible maximum distance to just see a plane, but that (from the Promise and Reality: Beyond Visual Range (BVR) Air-To-Air Combat document that GGTharos posted*) 9km for an F-16, 12km for an F-15 is fairly average.

 

At this distance it’s impossible to see what side the plane is flying for, so labels at this distance should all be the same colour.

 

For BS purposes lets say labels appear at 20km for a bomber/transport, 15km for a fighter. At this range the label should be something you have to look for, but which can be seen if the player looks in the right place – small – maybe the size of a full stop on this page & coloured in a way that has some contrast against sky and ground, but doesn’t actually grab attention. I’ve found {125, 0, 125} to do the job.

As the planes get closer the type can be revealed, but not the coalition - say 12km for a bomber/transport 9km for and F-15, 7km for an F-16, at 6km you’re probably close enough to see the colour scheme & tell who the plane is flying for so labels could give this away, and at 2km (?) be able to identify the specific plane & tell who’s flying it.

 

So in roughly LO label format (meters to large, medium, small) red side label colour, blue side label colour.

 

AirFormat = {}

-- an extra line of (AirFormat[250, 250, 250] = "" neutral, neutral) would be nice

AirFormat[2000, 2000, 2000] = "%N %n %P"

AirFormat[6000, 6000, 6000] = "%N" red, blue

AirFormat[12000, 9000, 7000] = "%N" neutral, neutral

AirFormat[17000, 11000, 10000] = "-'-" neutral, neutral

AirFormat[20000, 15000, 15000] = "." neutral, neutral

 

-- truck, armoured vehicle, car

GroundFormat = {}

GroundFormat[1000, 1000, 1000] = "%N" red, blue

GroundFormat[3000, 2500, 2000] = "%N" neutral, neutral

GroundFormat[5500, 5000, 4500] = "'" neutral, neutral

GroundFormat[6500, 6000, 5500] = "." neutral, neutral

 

NavyFormat = {}

NavyFormat[1500] = ""

NavyFormat[5000] = "%N" red, blue

NavyFormat[12000] = "%N neutral, neutral

NavyFormat[20000] = "*" neutral, neutral

NavyFormat[40000] = "." neutral, neutral

 

WeaponFormat = {}

WeaponFormat[500] = "" neutral, neutral

WeaponFormat[1500] = "%D" neutral, neutral

WeaponFormat[3500] = "-" neutral, neutral

WeaponFormat[5500] = "." neutral, neutral

 

You’ll notice that at the max distances everything looks the same – there’s something there, but you can’t tell what. Also for a plane (etc) at certain distances you know it’s a plane, but not whether it’s a big plane far away, or a smaller one closer to you …

 

The weapon formats are optimistic – but that’s partially the point with labels – at some level they are also a beginner’s aide.

 

It would also be an improvement if label configuration could be forced by servers (I know they can decide if they’re on or off, but I don’t know if they can force a particular configuration if they’re ‘on’) which would allow servers to run ‘newbie’ missions with labels reduced but still there…

 

*which has some interesting reading on the dismal PK achieved by BVR missile launches, up to and including the AIM-120 launches in operation southern watch.

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The labels are never a realistic option, and only be used for training and practice.

 

If it is true that the images in two dimensions offered by computer screens very difficult vision, there is no perception of depth, there is no perception of movement (2D images, the screen is flat), the scale of everything is very small .

 

Yet the labels are never the solution. Alternatives should be explored.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Cavallers del Cel - Comunintat Catalana de Simulació http://www.cavallersdelcel.cat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Falcon 4, you can visually 'lock on' to an aircraft with the padlock function. If it were possible to hit a key and get a zoomed-in version of the padlocked target, that would probably be the most realistic solution. You'd still have to identify the target yourself, but you'd have the chance to do so in a resolution comparable to what a real pilot would see - with the appropriate amount of haze to decrease contrast, just like in real life. Since the zoom factor would be the same every time, you'd still have more trouble identifying small targets compared to BUFFs at the same range.

 

Just my 2 cents.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]



- Study flight sim geek since Falcon 3.0 -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The labels are never a realistic option, and only be used for training and practice.

 

If it is true that the images in two dimensions offered by computer screens very difficult vision, there is no perception of depth, there is no perception of movement (2D images, the screen is flat), the scale of everything is very small .

 

Yet the labels are never the solution. Alternatives should be explored.

 

 

Care to share those alternatives? 2D CRT/LCD monitors aren't a realistic option either but thats what most of us have. Most of the equipment we use for these sims are a paultry imitation of reality at best, but again, its what we have to work with.

 

I can honestly say that I use labels about 50% of the time I play. From various sources and discussion on various boards, I have tweaked those labels to be a lot less forgiving. 1nm for missiles and from 4 to 8 nm for planes, depending on how I feel. NO labels for naval or ground targets, I don't find them necessary. Also, my label for missiles just says "Missile" as opposed the specific type. 1 nm gives me about one second to see the missile before impact. Not enough time to pull anything unrealistic, but enough to be able to know whether or not the missile has been defeated. Also, I use the same color for all labels, regardless of blue force or red force.

 

If people here can make an honest arguement why the realistc G setting in Lockon isn't realistic, I'd expect them to at least understand my point of view. If you want to simulate a trained, expirience pilot wearing the proper equipment and doing AGSM, I want to simulate the pilot with 20/20 vision or better in a real environment who is trained to recognize various enemy aircraft.

 

I can fully understand everyone playing online just deciding to turn of labels as a standard. I do not play online, so I get to tailor labels how I want. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Weta43

 

I like your ideas. As long as I can change the distances, I'm ok with ED taking a more serious look at default distances.

 

@GreyStork

 

You can do just that. You can padlock something and then hit the key for the zoomed in view.

 

The problem is that this is a very time-intensive way to VID targets. Where a pilot might be able to see and VID 4 bandits all at once, you're stuck padlocking and zooming in on each. Labels in F4 are an iffy thing. The "far" labels are completely pointless unless you like to see that MiG-29 and the R-77 its shooting 30 miles away. "Close" labels are better, but the problem is that you can see EVERYTHING from 8nm, including missiles. Labels in F4 are about as un-customizable as possible. However, turning on close labels at least once in your lifetime during a campaign is a must IMO. For me, it was like my eyes were open to how alive the air is on day 1.

 

F4AF also has a "smart scale" option which will attempt to make things bigger with more detail at realistic distances.

 

I think the real problem is that even if something is a visible dot on your screen, you have to really scrutinize your available view to notice that dot. In reality, it seems like that dot would be much more visible and something that the pilot would more readily notice even if he just glanced in that direction. Customizable labels are handy because they allow you to look around and at the very least know that something is out their 15km away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...Well? You gonna leave us hanging?

 

My English is very bad and I have to use a translator to talk online. As if that was not my phrase is understood to be wrong, or I have misunderstood his.

 

I said that to me, the tags are never a solution, and it would be good to explore alternative methods, what you say that if I am going to go? What if I am going to leave? Or the online translator translates poorly or not because I understand that answer.

 

So I include in my own language if someone can tell the misunderstanding

 

CASTELLANO

 

Mi ingles es muy malo y debo usar un traductor en linea para conversar. Por lo que no se si mi frase se entiende de manera errónea, o yo he entendido mal la suya.

 

Yo he dicho que para mi, las etiquetas nunca son una solución, y que sería buena explorar métodos alternativos, ¿y tu dices que si yo me voy a ir? ¿que si los voy a abandonar? O el traductor en linea lo traduce mal o no entiendo porque esa contestación.

 

También lo incluyo en mi idioma por si alguien puede indicarme el malentendido.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Cavallers del Cel - Comunintat Catalana de Simulació http://www.cavallersdelcel.cat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My English is very bad and I have to use a translator to talk online. As if that was not my phrase is understood to be wrong, or I have misunderstood his.

 

I said that to me, the tags are never a solution, and it would be good to explore alternative methods, what you say that if I am going to go? What if I am going to leave? Or the online translator translates poorly or not because I understand that answer.

 

So I include in my own language if someone can tell the misunderstanding

 

CASTELLANO

 

Mi ingles es muy malo y debo usar un traductor en linea para conversar. Por lo que no se si mi frase se entiende de manera errуnea, o yo he entendido mal la suya.

 

Yo he dicho que para mi, las etiquetas nunca son una soluciуn, y que serнa buena explorar mйtodos alternativos, їy tu dices que si yo me voy a ir? їque si los voy a abandonar? O el traductor en linea lo traduce mal o no entiendo porque esa contestaciуn.

 

Tambiйn lo incluyo en mi idioma por si alguien puede indicarme el malentendido.

 

IN SPANISH

 

Legolasindar, lo que D-Scythe dice es un chiste. Te ha dicho "bien, ahora nos dejas ahorcarnos?" debido a que contestas "Las etiquetas no son la soluciуn, hay que buscar alternativas"... Es un chiste malo de cualquier forma :)

 

*******

 

I explain in spanish the D-Scythe's joke :)

 

Regards!!



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, of course it was a bad joke...cause it was more like a "tease," than a joke ;)

 

BTW, if Legolasindar really is using a translator, than that is pretty insane. Who would've thought a computer program can write better than most native English speakers?

sigzk5.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, if Legolasindar really is using a translator, than that is pretty insane. Who would've thought a computer program can write better than most native English speakers?

 

I'll second that. I understood enough of his Spanish to realize that his English translation is probably 100% accurate.

 

Can I order one of those that will translate my English into perfect Russian, German, French, Arabic, and Japanese please?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, if Legolasindar really is using a translator, than that is pretty insane. Who would've thought a computer program can write better than most native English speakers?

 

Heh. It has indeed been my observation that the worst writers here are actually among those, whose native language is English. Funny how that works... :)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]



- Study flight sim geek since Falcon 3.0 -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>Who would've thought a computer program can write better than most

native English speakers?

 

Well, even with English being my 'first' language, it's very believable!

 

Personally I feel that padlock views match labels as immersion killers. Even

snap views are in that same category, IMO.

 

TrackIR was a great solution for me to increase the suspension of disbelief.

That, combined with the 'view zoom' feature which I've mapped to my X52 Pro

precision slider, works for me in offsetting the monitors lack of visual acuity.

I even disable the Z-Axis in my TrackIR because I prefer the zoom function

mapped to the throttle slider.

 

-Surfer

  • Like 1

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

/i7 860 @ 4.18 ghz air/Asus Maximus Formula III/4 gig DDR3 1600

/Sapphire VaporX 5850 2 gig DDR5 oc'ed/Noctua CPU Air Cooler

/3ea WD 74 gig Raptors in RAID 0/1 TB WD Caviar/Antec 900

/Windows 7 Home 64 bit/MS Gaming Keyboard/Logitec G5 Mouse

/Saitek X52 Pro/TrackIR Vector/3ea Cougar MFD's/3ea 23" LED's

/Thermaltake 650w PS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gracias amalahama.

 

Amalahama Thank you for that clarification, with the translation did not understand that it was a joke, in part because apparently it translates poorly :) That certainly is the translator of Google. And so it seems from Spanish to English well, but from English to Spanish as the Google translates quite wrong. :(

 

And now another bad joke ;)

 

What tells one death to other?

-- Would you like wormys?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Cavallers del Cel - Comunintat Catalana de Simulació http://www.cavallersdelcel.cat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the 'view zoom' feature which I've mapped to my X52 Pro

precision slider, works for me in offsetting the monitors lack of visual acuity

 

That's the solution I use - & it does let you see objects at a distance - while at the same time reducing your field of view to 2 degrees & removing any semblance of peripheral vision you had before zooming in.

 

There is no solution that allows full peripheral vision ( to the extent available with a monitor ) and still allows that visual acuity in the area of focus. Except perhaps a HD wide angle 3D display - or properly configured labels...

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

& I'd say, when they do a 3D version of the CES 2008 - Alienware Curve prototype display that a computer costing less than $8,000 can run at more than 20FPS - labels will be redundant.

Till then - it's not realy a viable alternative for your average user is it ?

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...