Revert back to old ditance #s

[vorticon]

the second one in that last thing looks best...

it could work if we used the current ah2 system for 2-3k+ and for under 2k it switches to something like karnaks idea...

[straffo]

Originally posted by Kaz
I LOVE the current method, keep it

sorry ,but it's IMo not a question of love

@vorticon : this would be a good compromise

[Nifty]

Karnak, that is frickin' brilliant.  

It's not a range indicator we need (that's what good gunsights are supposedly for), it's a rate of closure indicator.

My preferred enemy icon system would give me rate of closure and which team they were on.  It would be up to me to judge distance and plane type.  Friendly icons would still have the player name though.

[Sled]

I like Karnaks system (the first w/ plus and minus) for ranges less than 1K. At ranges above 1K I like the current system in AH1. Why?

It is relatively easy to judge distance and closure below 1K.
But it is very difficult to determine the distance between a 5.5K dot and a 3.5-4.0K dot.

There is no real Depth perception in this game, because there is no depth. This is a 2D game. All you have without distance markers, is the ability to interpret Pixel size and rate of growth.

HTC has to ask itself. Are we trying to make the game easier  for those that have been playing flight sims for years and years, and already find the game easy at times. Or are we trying to make the game easier for those who are relatively new to flight sims, therefore increasing the chance they will want to "Stick with it"

The current AH1 system does nothing to hurt the experienced, but it does help the "new guy" have a fighting chance

[Karnak]

Depth perception in humans is essentially not there past ~50ft  (IIRC) due to how close our eyes are together.  In a natural environment that is fine though.  We use size to judge distance past that.

[Batz]

I wonder if this thread is another excersize in futility?

HT do you have any interest in adjusting the icon types beyond what has already been done in AH2? Which BTW I happen to like but the idea of no range counters with a "fade in" color is a lot of fun.

Any comment?

[Sled]

"I wonder if this thread is another excersize in futility?"


It probably is, but it is nice to think the HTC wants our ideas and request, and actually gives them some consideration.

[Dowding]

I love Karnak's idea - the 2nd bitmap, 2nd concept is the most intuitive to me.

Would this rate of closure thing pose an increased overheads issue within the game? I hope something like this is implemented one day, perhaps with a fade-in icon system.

[hitech]

I look at karnaks icons, and can not guess what they meen. There for lots of other people would have the very same problem.

You might want to discuss what you wish out of icon system, not how to implement it first.

Item to discuss first,
Do you wish range info. If so how detailed.
Is there enof closure rate info giveng with the range info, if not do we wish to give closure rate info.

Next think about how it will effect game play. Will it change fighting style, if it does is the way it effects it a good thing?

Also think about how well a new person to AH will understand the info. Simple thing like what range should I shoot at become a problem.

If no range information is given is it just harder or is it more realisitic.

Whats the next thing that has to be written that people will be asking for. I would guess the next thing people would be asking for is a range estimator circles.

The one thing I have been considering is adding a + or - on the range once inside of 1k.

HiTech

[Morpheus]

Hitech,

I am really just curious as to why you decided to go with the current icons in AH2. Not just the distance read outs but also having them on the bottom rather than on the top?

More simply put. What was wrong with the way the icons are seen in AH1?


Morpheus

[Stratocaster]

Morph- the icons are on the bottom so when you fly low on the terain you cannot be seen easily

[bozon]

Originally posted by MoRphEuS
Hitech,

I am really just curious as to why you decided to go with the current icons in AH2. Not just the distance read outs but also having them on the bottom rather than on the top?

More simply put. What was wrong with the way the icons are seen in AH1?


Morpheus

I don't want to speak in HT name, but it has been discussed in the past.
The text is below the planes now, so it will be harder to see over the nose. Same with the red box around the target - I find that in AHI I'm just aiming to the middle of the box instead of at the plane in it - makes gunnery much easier.

Good points by HT to direct the discussion.
As I see it (in 1024x768) closure and distance estimation is very hard in "low" resolutions. Once under 1k it's reasonable, but over it, almost impossible. So the info I need is a "rough" distance estimation in long ranges and "closure" in short ranges.

I belive making the range tags tick in different intervals depending on the range is a good compromise and the most "newbie friendly" solution.
I suggest 0.5 kyards ticks over 2k, 0.2 kyards when 1k-2k and 100 yards under 1k.
I don't mind making it 50 yards ticks when under 500 yards.

It's just a matter of "fine tuning" the ticks.

Bozon

[detch01]

Originally posted by hitech
I look at karnaks icons, and can not guess what they meen. There for lots of other people would have the very same problem.

You might want to discuss what you wish out of icon system, not how to implement it first.

Item to discuss first,
Do you wish range info. If so how detailed.
Is there enof closure rate info giveng with the range info, if not do we wish to give closure rate info.

Next think about how it will effect game play. Will it change fighting style, if it does is the way it effects it a good thing?

Also think about how well a new person to AH will understand the info. Simple thing like what range should I shoot at become a problem.

If no range information is given is it just harder or is it more realisitic.

Whats the next thing that has to be written that people will be asking for. I would guess the next thing people would be asking for is a range estimator circles.

The one thing I have been considering is adding a + or - on the range once inside of 1k.

HiTech

IMHO game icons should only provide users with historically "realistic" information that computer screens can't. That boils down to country and aircraft type ID. I have the MkI Eyeball for figuring range. Once I'm saddled up I do a quick check of my 6 and line up on the target visually. I don't read the range and then do the guzinta's to decide where I need to aim to hit what I'm shooting at.
  If you're going to add stuff to an already cluttered sight picture I would really appreciate being able to turn off what I don't use - kind of like auto-takeoff (something visually indicating the player's in "training mode" or something).


Cheers,

[Batz]

I think there 3 things icons should provide for.

1. Enemy / Friendly - accomplished by red and green

2. Plane Type - In an arena where you have many plane types in a fight its important to ID what plane is what. In real life the battles involve a few plane types.

3. Closure Rate - Right now this is accomplished by range counters. WWIIOL USe a fade in icon with a half circle deal.

Simply have the icon fade in from 6k (light red) to 1k (bold red) would give a sense pf closure.



The above animation is with 6 frames. I should have scaled the 51 as well to give it a better effect but you get the picture.

As you close is gets bolder and it pulls away in fades out.

[Zanth]

Under a certain distance (when very close) I would prefer the icon to go away all together.  Otherwise, at far range some of these ideas (as well as the current way) work for me.

(up close the plane art seems good enough now - actually the counter etc begins to get in the way)