PDA

View Full Version : DOT size



HeinzBar
11-21-2004, 08:37 AM
S!,
Let me start off saying that so far, this patch is a vast improvement over the initial release of PF. I salute the effort made by the programmers to improve this sim by listening to the community and implementing those much needed changes.

However, I must disagree w/ the current look of the visual DOTS. As it is now, it is very difficult to judge distance w/ these DOTS. The DOTS haven't really improved visiability over land masses IHO. The DOTS visable by air are simply too large, and not very asethically pleasing. In short, I'd like to see something maybe inbetween these DOTS and the old. If this isn't possible, I'd rather see the old DOTS return.

Sincerely,
HB

FatBoyHK
11-21-2004, 09:40 AM
agree, although the original one is not good either, the new one is a gross overdone... very unrealistic, if I must choose between the original one and the new one I would go for the former.

But I must stress that the original one is NOT good, planes disappear way too easily.

plumps_
11-21-2004, 09:46 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=3191061342

F19_Orheim
11-21-2004, 01:49 PM
Lots of "dot threads" nowadays http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

ucanfly
11-21-2004, 01:54 PM
These new dots give us greater flexibility than ever and are far superior to disappearing dots at less than 1 km. Learn how to use the mp_dotrange command in the manual before complaining.

LeadSpitter_
11-21-2004, 02:06 PM
Look at the bright side more people are flying full difficulty settings now.

italianofalco
11-21-2004, 03:01 PM
AGREE completely with LeadSpitter and uCANFLY NEW DOTS ARE GOOD!! LEAVE THEM LIVE and people who complain can manage with mp-dotrange. these dots "balance the "full real options of this game to real life wiew

Stiglr
11-22-2004, 12:00 AM
Screw eye candy.

I am in favor of VISIBILITY. And the old "gray pencil specks" were awful for visibility.

TgD Thunderbolt56
11-22-2004, 07:56 AM
Well, initially I thought they were great then I found I was having difficulty judging closure rate. It seems it's just because it's different and I am in favor of being able to see better.

I know when I fly in RL spotting other planes is very important and I have little trouble spotting them over 4k away and can often ID them accurately from there. With the limitations of the computer screen, I think I'd like to keep them for now. The argument that it's almost impossible to sneak in and out I find to be inaccurate. Maybe tougher, but certainly not impossible.

TB

LilHorse
11-22-2004, 01:33 PM
I sorta preferred the old dots. I rarely had problems in no-icon servers with the old ones. And it's not cuz I have some kind of sick rig. It's actually pretty outdated and just a 17" monitor to boot.

I guess I just developed techniques for IDing planes. And I do have concerns that the new dots will make bouncing harder. Oh well, here's to clouds and staying up sun. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

NetDaemon
11-22-2004, 01:48 PM
For Christ`s sake people, you can customize the new "dots" visibility range in the "rcu" file.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif Read the godd@amn readme file for a change.

LEXX_Luthor
11-22-2004, 06:50 PM
LilHorse:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I guess I just developed techniques for IDing planes. And I do have concerns that the new dots will make bouncing harder. Oh well, here's to clouds and staying up sun. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thank You http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

We can now *see* bounce targets against the landscape far below. BnZ simmers would need the new dots. Sorry if the dots also give our BnZ aircraft away in clear blue sky, but if we study history's real life Bouncing Aces, they write about how they set themselves up to attack out of the sun.

YES! We finally need to study the real life Bouncing Aces and how they used the sun to advantage. It took the Aces a long time to set themselves up in position near the sun, and that requirement is missinig with the old invisible dots. Even the new dots should be a very hard to see against the FB sun. However, can internet dogfight server control the sunglare?

Most real life pilots who got bounced simply were not looking--even if the attacking plane could easily be seen if the pilot just LOOKED. Looking around the sky is hard to teach, but all the Aces learned how to ~look~ or they never lived long enough to become Aces. Even against the sky, the new dots are more realistic than the old light grey single pixel dots--I am old timer aircraft spotter from my days of amatuer astronomy and cloud skywatching. The trick the real life aces used is bounce out of the *sun* -- yes bounce from the sun. This is how you set up historicallly correct bounces. Experienced pilots rarely if ever got bounced unless they were attacked by equally experienced pilots hiding in the sun. On the other hand, spending Time to use the sun (and clouds) to advantage may be unpopular in the quick match internet dogfight servers. For offwhine play, I wish the AI was programmed to lose vision near the sun much like Flanker 1.0 jet sim from 1994 had heat seeking missiles distracted by the sun (a moving sun which changed position through the day just like real life). If they could program this in 1994, ten years ago,.... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

GvSAP_Wingnut
11-22-2004, 08:23 PM
Some historical perspective on how important having the upper hand was, posted by an RAF pilot - a BoB vet - at our website in response to a question about the effectiveness of camouflage:

"Upper wing paint was quite effective, but you weren't so bothered about what was below - it was what was in the sun that mattered. Some folk had a knack of spotting them but, for most, it boiled down to a disciplined search pattern - same as if looking for a dinghy in the sea. And like night vision. You often saw things when you were not looking directly at them. Sometimes it was just a yellow nose cone that caught your eye."

HeinzBar
11-23-2004, 12:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by NetDaemon:
For Christ`s sake people, you can customize the new "dots" visibility range in the "rcu" file.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif Read the godd@amn readme file for a change. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is the type of answer I expect coming from this forum...geez.

HB

NetDaemon
11-23-2004, 12:20 PM
Well, reading the game`s documentation will save you from such answers in the future.

TheGozr
11-23-2004, 12:36 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=26310365&m=6361045442

HeinzBar
11-23-2004, 11:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by NetDaemon:
Well, reading the game`s documentation will save you from such answers in the future. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You honestly believe that your answer was helpful? You assume I didn't look at the readme. I did glance at it. Obviously, it didn't save me from from the obnoxious reply. Now, I went back and I looked for instructions in the 'readme.rtf, readme_v2.01, readme_v2.04, readme_v3.01, and readmePF. It's late, but I still don't see any instructions about changing the rcu in the above listed files.
Please show me where in this patch that it has the instructions to make these changes? What version? Does this apply to client side only? Does this affect server side only? Does the documentation answer these questions? The dot_range, color etc, can be customized according to old procedures found in the original IL2 documentations. But the announcement of a dot change was for this patch. I stand corrected if there are instructions and answers about the dot change in the current readme.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

WWSensei
11-24-2004, 09:07 AM
It's not in the readme. It's in the Manual for the game. There is about half a page dedicated to mp_dotrange alone.

Pretty good data on mp_dotrange was also included in the README when it was first introduced though I don't recall which version off the top of my head (pre-AEP).

tHeBaLrOgRoCkS
11-24-2004, 09:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TheGozr:
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=26310365&m=6361045442 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


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

TacticalYak3
11-24-2004, 10:09 AM
If I had to choose between the old and new dots definitely the new ones save my eyes and allow me to finally really enjoy no-icon campaigns.

If I was being greedy, like others have said, some more tweaking/help with mp_dotrange from Oleg with portraying closure distances would help. He said he was working on something so hopefully the dots will be even better soon.

Up the dots!

LEXX_Luthor
11-25-2004, 01:10 AM
~hi~ Heinz, yes the new dots don't get smaller in the range 4-8 km like they should--becuase the Default mp_dotrange is too large. I just now figured this out with my new computer setup...my old motherboard crashed (overheating somewhere) just as I began experiments on the new dots after the Patch. I knew the new dots were realistic somehow but they are also "too much" and so not very realistic (but neither are the old dots). The solution is lower the DOT range to get "new" dots at medium range and "old" dots at long range. Also may help with resolution differences. Czech it out, it works Perfect.

Dot Test mission and ~sweet~ dotrange test file for "rcu" here...

~> http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=1751051542