F3 view for IL2

[EskimoJoe]

It's not supposed to be fair, otherwise every plane would have the 6 view of the Yak-9 and the forward view of the P-51B.

True, it isn't supposed to be fair. However, if forced with only realistic views in the IL-2 and other similar aircraft in the MAs, whats the point of flying said aircraft there? I fly in the Main Arenas for good fights, for fun. If I'm blind, I can't see if the opportunity for a good fight arises, and will most likely end up BnZ'd with no 6 call. What's the point of this, I would ask, and most likely end up spending my 15$ a month on a text based browser game instead.

Ground-Attack is my niche. I don't desire to fight in the furball or win the war, I like hitting tanks while defending bases. Sure, the occasional fighter pilot will try to ruin my fun, but luckily I can currently spot the threat to my fun with the F3 view, and have at least the chance to eliminate the attacking aircraft.

HiTech is trying to (and doing well with) balancing realism vs game. This is merely one of those reality vs fun balances.

[Anaxogoras]

True, it isn't supposed to be fair. However, if forced with only realistic views in the IL-2 and other similar aircraft in the MAs, whats the point of flying said aircraft there?

Is this a rhetorical question?

[shreck]

True, it isn't supposed to be fair. However, if forced with only realistic views in the IL-2 and other similar aircraft in the MAs, whats the point of flying said aircraft there? I fly in the Main Arenas for good fights, for fun. If I'm blind, I can't see if the opportunity for a good fight arises, and will most likely end up BnZ'd with no 6 call. What's the point of this, I would ask, and most likely end up spending my 15$ a month on a text based browser game instead.

Ground-Attack is my niche. I don't desire to fight in the furball or win the war, I like hitting tanks while defending bases. Sure, the occasional fighter pilot will try to ruin my fun, but luckily I can currently spot the threat to my fun with the F3 view, and have at least the chance to eliminate the attacking aircraft.

HiTech is trying to (and doing well with) balancing realism vs game. This is merely one of those reality vs fun balances.

It would make more sense to just modify the internal cockpit for increased visibility, The idea that planes such as the il2 get to have "superior" views compared to even the pony is just ridiculous!

[SmokinLoon]

HTC needs to define the following:

1. What purpose does F3 mode serve?

2. What handicap does the F3 mode accommodate for or attribute does it lend credit to?

3. What individual characteristics of the aircraft in question lend to the F3 mode being available for use.

Once those three issues are defined then I believe the current system of over applying the "bomber" classification as justification for allow the said aircraft the ability to use F3 will obviously inconsistent. 

As I see it, the F3 view is supposed to give credit to one thing: Two or more sets of eyes from a single aircraft able to see at almost 360d around the plane at any particular time.  That is it. 

I suggest HTC abandon its current "all bombers get F3 ability" position and start looking at a universal application of individual aircraft characteristics.  Because as it is, the 110G-2 has the same exact pilot/gunner positions as the D3A, Il-2, SBD, etc, and it doesnt get the F3 view.  For the record, Im not advocating giving the 110 the F3 view, Im just pointing out the lack of logical application of views.

       

[E25280]

Im just pointing out the lack of logical application of views.

Actually, the logic is quite clear . . . it's just that some people don't like it.

[Anaxogoras]

Actually, the logic is quite clear . . . it's just that some people don't like it.

Classification by stipulation is hardly convincing.

[SmokinLoon]

Actually, the logic is quite clear . . . it's just that some people don't like it.

The logic of applying it to a single aircraft classification with a very broad array of attributes is not consistent.  Therefore... illogical? 

Regardless of who does or who does not like it, the current standard is not applied equally based on the ability of the crew to see or not see view angles.  Is it any different than saying all cows have 4 legs?

[EskimoJoe]

Is this a rhetorical question?

Yes.

It would make more sense to just modify the internal cockpit for increased visibility, The idea that planes such as the il2 get to have "superior" views compared to even the pony is just ridiculous!

That subtracts realism for events such as FSO or Snapshots, or even the AvA.