In RL, objects seen are much more clearer and in more detail than we could ever reproduce on our setups. With the extra detail, one could easily discern the front of the plane and the back of the plane, leading to an assumption of closure or separation.
Doesn't matter.
The smallest of detail levels which the computer cannot produce, is also impossible to perceive with human eyes. Assuming a steady gain on a certain square shaped target out at 1000 yards, when he closes in to 900 yards the difference in size which shrinks to indicate closure is barely 1mm for each sides. The total decrease in relative area of the "picture" we get is less than 10% and is almost impossible to perceive.
The more sensitive people with better eyesight get a "feeling" of closure, but even they cannot confirm it and must wait until the target closes even more, and then compare the latest perceived size of the total area, with the one he's seen few seconds ago which was at 1000 yards, to be sure of anything.
Many people in real life, despite the physical shortcomings of a human eye, confirm that a physical object is closing or departing by means of logic, rather than actual physical confirmation.
In short, they think to themselves,
"oh that target is closing in", and in most cases it turns out true - but not because their eyes have confirmed it, but because their sense of logic has deduced the results according to the situation he was left in.
When there aren't enough visual cues or relative background objects to confirm such facts, people make mistakes in judging distance and closure/departure all the time. And even when the distance is not so far out.
Studies concerned with accidents in road crossings indicate a much higher rate in typical rural road crossings or rural highways, contrary to the belief that the city areas will have more accidents with pedestrians crossing roads. The reason is tracked down to the roads in rural areas are laid down straight in the midst of large, empty flatlands, which there are no visual cues to compare the closing automobile with the background to get a sense of closure. In this situation, people about to run across a road observes an incoming car some tens of yards away, think that the closing car is far away enough for him to run across the road, and then it turns out wrong and they get run over.
Same thing with animals with much quicker reflexes than humans - some people say deers and racoons and such nocturnal animals are run over while crossing roads because they are 'tranced' by the lights, but its simply not true. They simply misjudged distance, and couldn't react in time.
I drive a blind guy to work on occasion. Next time I will ask him if he can tell me the range to the exit sign using time, memory, and logic.
You don't understand.
By time, memory and logic, I mean that people react to their environment by "assuming" a theory inside their minds, before any objective observation is made out. They deal out the situation and distance - in case of air combat, people watch on object, and then they assume by according to their position and situation whence the battle started. Then they confirm their own 'assumption' whether a target is closing or departing by observing it for an extended time. Sense of distance and closure/departure, doesn't come at a glance.
That was the case with 200 yard increments opposed to what we had before in AH1. People see an enemy plane, and then they observe for2~3 seconds whether it changes or not. Not so with the +/- indicator - it gives out relative E states at a glance.
Then as I suggested before, lets ask HT if he can add the + - thingy to the CNTRL-I switch and you can turn it off. Don't presume for an instant that what you think is needed or not needed will suffice for some one elses enjoyment of this game. This + - thingy in totality is not a big deal, but some must make mountains out of mole hills.
Such info directly concerning combat should not be of choice. The problem is the +/- indicator gives out information impossible to perceive at a glance. The 200 yards 'tick' was cleverly timed in that it took about as long to figure out distance changes as in real life, without providing any more info. The +/- indicator is excessive info which makes flying and fighting much easier than it should be, typically beneficial for one's SA. If such a system is to be maintained or discared it should be on an overall scale - not local.
If it is indeed to be discarded, then noone should use it.
A better alternative, would be making one able to cycle through icon modes, so one offers us yard increments, and another one gets rid of the yard increments and uses only the +/-. Then that, would be a fair deal.
Refuted ... so what. Cause its been refuted doesn't make it a real. The computers that we have CANNOT handle 3D environments like the real life. Refute till your blue in the face, its still true.
But unfortunately in this case, it is real.
People misjudged distances all the time in real life. That's why they needed to get in close to shoot at stuff, get into ranges which they cannot mistake, by comparing the target in front of them with visuals cues such as the gunsights.
When targets were further off, then effectively people would have no way of confirming if it was 1000 yards or 1500 yards out. The only thing they would know is how much the target grew or shrank in size over a certain given time(not at a glance, mind you), and how fast that happened. By that they would judge, upon relativity.
Generally ? ... rule of thumb ? ... usually tend to make very weak points in a discussion. I don't accept those conditions or conjecture. You need something more solid and my eyes to believe it.
Because a stronger point is not required in this case. Its true computers cannot depict every millimeter of detail - and thats why we have, and should have icons on.
This point proves itself when playing other games like FB/AEP which boasts probably the best visual quality overall in any kind of commercial flightsim game upto date - even with such high standards in graphics spotting out enemies far off, is a bit*h.
So, we have icons - plane/country indicators, and also distance indicators, which changes in 200 yard increments. For the reasons explained above, juding relative E-states is more than possible - provided that you observed the target for more than just a single glance, and can reason its relative E-status to your own plane, based on your knowledge of how fast the range counters dropped from 1000 to 800 to 600 to 400. As long as you have that knowledge, the +/- indicators are not needed.
If you weren't observing the changes, and you suddenly see an enemy plane nearby, then there's no way of knowing whether the enemy is closing in real fast, or you are able to pull away and escape - you have to observe it from there how things are, and that may be too late for you... And that's how it should be.
I'm not saying those who can't get used to the system is stupid or anything. I'm saying what it was before the +/- increments made sense.
It's undeniable that the range increments as in AH1, or what we have now with the +/- indicators make fighting easier. In AH1, it didn't matter when you saw the enemy plane, or you whether or not you were paying attention. As long as you spot it out before 1000 yards it'd take less than 1 second to figure out what the relative E state was, and deal out the best cards you have to whether to try a reversal, try to run, or to just evade.
Not so in AH2, and I don't find it unreasonable that people have major gripes in that suddenly they can't time their moves, or aim the way they used to as before.
But that's the natural thing to be, and the thing it should be.
