Revert back to old ditance #s

[Stratocaster]

I hate it! I just hate it! your on somones 6 700 feet than all of a sudden 400........ revert back to old sytem! everyone in favor say aye and against say nay!............................. ................... aye!

[Grits]

I like it, leave it as it is an learn better SA.

[Batz]

You will get used to it...

[straffo]

Originally posted by Grits
I like it, leave it as it is an learn better SA.

hu ?

And you do you estimate closure on a target ?


I agree with Batz I'll get used to it

But I think HT would better rework the icon system than using this 200 yard increment (note : there is no proposition for a remplacement in this sentence )

Imagine driving your car with distance information in increment of 20 yds.

Sound deadly no ?

[ALF]

I find he current system to be somewhat sucky:D

I like the idea of a less laser accurate than AH1 system.  200 yard increments seems a bit low on the # of increments scale, but I only notice it because its new.  In the MA, I never look at aircraft distance numbers unless they are at least 800 out or farther.

Im too busy flying!

Besides, this will allow for more people with poor SA to get caught with thier flight suites down as I BOOM n ZOOM them hehehe.

[Kweassa]

If you had been observing the movement of the enemy plane closely for some time, it isn't hard to figure out whether the plane is closing or not, straffo, even if the increments change in 200yds.

 However, the wonderful pro of this icon system is, if you suddenly discover an enemy plane near you, you have no info on where, when, and how fast he got there.. he could be closing very fast, not closing at all, or you may be extending away from him.

 You have no way to find that out in a split second, whereas in the old icon system the rate of the numbers "ticking away" would immediately show the closure/departure rate.. even if you just discovered him.

 IMO, the current icon system is indeed, a step in the right direction for promoting better SA.

[Karnak]

I'd like to see the range indicator go away entirely and just have a rate of closure indicator in it's place.

Here are three varients of an idea that I've posted before. Each of the three lines is a varient.  In the first line pluses, minus' and equals symbols are used to give some indication of closure rate.  In the second line a bubble that ranges from black filled to white filled with the brighter color indicating a faster closure rate supplies the data.  In the third line a red dot that becomes progressively more transparent ranging from solid red for very fast closure to completely transparent for a rapidly receding target.


Each column represents the same data.  Here is an example of what the data could mean:

1) The target is being approached by greater than 135mph.
2) The target is being approached by greater than 45mph but by less than 136mph.
3) The target is being approached by greater than 15mph but by less than 46mph.
4) The target is being approached by greater than 5mph but by less than 16mph
5) The target is being approached or escaping by less than 6mph.
6) The target is escaping by greater than 5mph but by less than 16mph.
7) The target is escaping by greater than 15mph but by less than 46mph.
8) The target is escaping by greater than 45mph but by less than 136mph.
9) The target is escaping by greater than 135mph.


(It looks a lot better in .bmp format, curse .jpg corruption and .bmp file size)

[straffo]

I hate you Karnak

I was making a bitmap with the very same idea I especialy like the last one.

[Karnak]

Yeah, it was the last one that I thought of at 01:00 and caused me to finish the image and make the post.  It looks the most integrated and proffesional of the three.

Of course, unrestrained by the need for nine frames either of the second two could be much more gradual than the first.

[zanshin]

I don't like the 200 yd jumps at all, 100 yds  would perhaps be ok to my mind.

I can imagine preferring no close up distances at all , eg numbers down to 800 then no distances at all.

The constantly variable indicators look as if they could be very good.

Zanshin

[Stratocaster]

I could live with 100 but would rather have 50

[Reschke]

Why not just eliminate the numbers, dot, plus/minus, or circle and go with the only thing I like about the flight aspect of WW2OL and use the fading/darkening of the actual aircraft type designator. To me that is the only thing that CRS got right about the entire flight part of their game and it works fairly well and allows you to get a grasp on the closure/expanding distance rate of the aircraft.

Yeah flame away because I said WW2OL in a post about AH.

[Virage]

current method is an improvement over AH1.

fade in with decreased range sounds good.

[Kaz]

I LOVE the current method, keep it

[Karnak]

Here are some more closure rate icons that I thought up: