PDA

View Full Version : My thoughts on the aircraft labels/icons.... they should work in reverse !



MR.Reah
11-28-2004, 06:08 AM
Sounds strange at first but the more I thought about it- the more I think I like the idea. All the discussion about dot range and visibility set me thinking about the labels and one of the objections to using them........

Imagine this: The aircraft labels have both a 'far' and a 'near' range visability function:

....... in the distance we can set in km when they begin to be visible. So far so good-we have that- however- At close ranges we no longer want or really need to see the colored text or numeric display- since we are in range where we can recognize friend or foe- right?

Imagine now that we can set something like 'near range limit' to 'off'(where the lod is such that aircraft type and markings are plainly visible anyway) and hey- presto! they FADE OUT again............. since at this point we should have a good idea just what we are looking at- and no longer need the 'label' on...

Sound like a sane and practical idea worth tinkering with- or too much imagination? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Extreme_One
11-28-2004, 06:13 AM
That's spooky - I was thinking exactly the same thing last night...

NorrisMcWhirter
11-28-2004, 07:26 AM
HI,

Sounds good to me..as an option. I'm all for options.

Cheers,
Norris

Tallyho1961
11-28-2004, 08:11 AM
I love it. I sort of do this now by only toggling icons on to get a quick fix on the bandits if I can't see them without icons - then I tun them off. It's a bit distracting - but possible. Having the icons disappear inside a certain distance makes alot of sense.

rummyrum
11-28-2004, 08:46 PM
Just teach yourself profiles and you will not need icons here or there or anywhere.

LEXX_Luthor
11-29-2004, 05:58 PM
Text icon labels should NOT be needed, except for beginning simmer or those with well below average human vision.

Consider--if dots are made for low resolution simmers, then they are Happy, while high resolution simmers are forced to use text icon labels. If dots are made for high resolution simmers, then *both* types can see dots, and NOBODY needs text icon labels. This assumes dots cannot be made resolution independent, and Oleg has stated that they cannot be made so. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Something missed on this webboard:: Higher resolutions help aircraft identification and ability to see target behavior and attitude (orientation, or direction of pointing)...this should be of interest to simmers using expensive "UltraPro" video cards at low resolution 1024x768 for whatever reason....my "Amatuer" ATI~9200 does 1152x864 and now, with Patch 3.02, gives consistent 25fps at 1280x960. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

At higher resolutions, simmers can also read instrument guages better in full zoom out view. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Extreme_One
11-30-2004, 07:55 AM
Lex how 'bout ud old guys with glasses and only 17" monitors?

LEXX_Luthor
11-30-2004, 08:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Lex how 'bout ud old guys with glasses and only 17" monitors? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Don't know what you mean, but I wear glasses, vhave 17" monitor...and run ATI~9200 in 1152x864 and, now, 1280x960. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

How about this...we know that text icon labels require pixels to be displayed, and we know that at certain distances, depending on dotrange, the text icons begin to fade with range. Instead of text icon labels, an extra pixel or two is added to the Default dot--also fading with range, and mixing with the Default dot. Thinking of this, it is possible to have extra dot options available for all simmers.

RxMan
11-30-2004, 09:04 AM
Quikie answer/reply: (while waiting for patch)
In DFs people fly all kinda different planes, no way to ID from plane type. While doing wild aerobatic gyrations to avoid or aquire a firing fix, I lose sight of and acquire sight of different aircraft at close range, without some coloring (ie icons) I tend to shoot down the wrong people (it's a senility thing). Don't get me wrong, in coops I usually use distance icons only because of failings of monitors to adjust image size to distance, and I like that.

BM357_Raven
11-30-2004, 11:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Text icon labels should NOT be needed, except for beginning simmer or those with well below average human vision.

Consider--if dots are made for low resolution simmers, then they are Happy, while high resolution simmers are forced to use text icon labels. If dots are made for high resolution simmers, then *both* types can see dots, and NOBODY needs text icon labels. This assumes dots cannot be made resolution independent, and Oleg has stated that they cannot be made so. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Something missed on this webboard:: Higher resolutions help aircraft identification and ability to see target behavior and _attitude_ (orientation, or direction of pointing)...this should be of interest to simmers using expensive "UltraPro" video cards at low resolution 1024x768 for whatever reason....my "Amatuer" ATI~9200 does 1152x864 and now, with Patch 3.02, gives consistent 25fps at 1280x960. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

At higher resolutions, simmers can also read instrument guages better in full zoom out view. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why not just have an mp_dotrange DOTSIZE. I don't know about other Full Switch boyz, but I loved the larger dots.

I haven't kept up on the one issue of dot size. I'll have to surf the forums, unless someone wants to shoot me a link to dot size discussion...

BM357_Raven
11-30-2004, 11:05 AM
oh, duh.. I found it..lol:

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=7791071342

Stiglr
11-30-2004, 06:19 PM
WWII Online uses thinking like this, and it's why I feel they have the best EVER icon system ever devised.

Actually, I call it the "arc-con". It's a red circle around the enemy that helps you pick the little half pixel out of your visuals-limited monitor. At max range, after it fades in, there's a nice, 1/2-inch or so red circle.

As you close in, the circle breaks into an arc, and as range decreases, the arc winds down, clock wise. At close range, you barely have anything left: just a small red mark at about 9:00 to 10:00 (along with a text "SPIT" or whatever, which, IMO could be dispensed with; the red or blue arc does the IFF for you, and I wouldn't cry if i had to do the plane type ID myself).

This solution is pure genius. The only thing they did wrong in this regard was to have the arc-cons obscured by thier "mist layers". These appeared about every 500 meters after about 1km alt. So, if you were within arc-con range horizontally, but you and your target were on two sides of a mist layer, you would likely lose the arcon... and there was no chance you'd see the dot.