Tank

[NOT]

Oh but we need further explanation! Those of us who appreciate the nod towards realism in the tank sights and optical quality, and are intelligent enough to grasp the concept of the TC (and the linked MG's, "auto" transmission, etc), really like to hear why the system is so bad.  For that matter, I'm sure HTC needs to know as well.  We all want to know why we should go back to the same-same tank sights for every tank, have HTC's modelers waste dozens of hours of time modeling tank interiors, and why the manual transmission was superior.  Inquiring minds want to know!   

Thank you smokin for pointing out your superior intellect, those of us having a different opinion than yours are obviously not all there........  There is the token smiley to make things all nice and friendly ...........  






NOT

[muzik]

That's very easy to do. just drive to the exact same spot on a base (for example right in the center of the rearm pad), and look at the same 'drone' tank. A difference of 1-5' is negligible at total distances of D800 or so.

And that's exactly how I tested the different views and magnifications right after the GV system redesign, coming tot he same conclusions. An enterprising soul could even try to dig up this old thread...

I've never been interested enough to learn the mathematics of magnification so I will concede 715's and your points.

A brief search got me to another thread on zoom. It seems proven that the zoom is not 1 to 1, but something still seems missing though I can't put my finger on it yet.

The example I used of proper placement was not particularly what I had in mind for this missing data though.

It just occurred to me that maybe what I couldn't put my finger on was this, when using gunsight zoom the aircraft at a distance is not the only thing zoomed; the gunsight itself is also zoomed. So my question now is this, doesn't that mean the net effect of using zoom is 1:1? Because you are not only increasing size and clarity of something 300yds out, but increasing the size of the reticle which is right in front of you.

You are magnifying everything in your virtual world at a 1 to 1 ratio.

[715]

You are magnifying everything in your virtual world at a 1 to 1 ratio.

Yes, everything gets magnified the same amount, but it isn't 1:1 to what you'd see if you were sitting in a real plane.  It's 2.5 to 1 (at max zoom). 

Try this: get in a Spit and use max zoom (Z plus max ]).  Now pan down to look at the dashboard.  It looks huge does it.  Remember, your virutal pilot doesn't have his face right up next to the dashboard like you have yours up near your screen.  Yet the instruments are huge, way bigger (2.5 times bigger to be exact) than real life. 

The math is really easy.  Take my example: a Tiger I viewed broadside from the crossing point of the three runways.  The Tiger I hull is 6.32 meters long.  The distance from the Tiger I to the crossing point is 448 yds = 409.65 meters (according to AH Film viewer).  That means in real life, with no optical magnification, the Tiger I should subtend an angle of arctan(6.32meters/409.5meters) = 0.884 deg.  Now the Tiger I on my screen, at max zoom, is 17.5 mm wide and I normally view the screen from 18 inches (=457mm) so it subtends an angle of arctan(17.5mm/457mm) = 2.19 degrees.  So the AH max zoom view is bigger than real life by 2.19deg/0.884deg = 2.48  (i.e. about 2.5X).

[muzik]

  Remember, your virutal pilot doesn't have his face right up next to the dashboard like you have yours up near your screen. 

My virtual pilots head gets 2.5x bigger also, not just figuratively anymore considering this revelation. Not used to admitting that, but there you go.   

Magnification in RL doesn't do what you are describing. I couldn't look down at my dash panel if I was looking through a scope. It would be blurry. My head and the dash panel also don't increase in size at a 1:1 nor would the reticle you see so clearly. This means little except that something is not a precise translation of zoom function; therefor something is not being included in the equations and the equations you are using probably only apply to real life..

All the math you have done still doesn't prove anything to me other than the virtual objects get 2.5x bigger, not that it is actually increasing the pilots vision 2.5x.

Tell me this, at what distance does AH model pilot furthest sighting of another aircraft? 8k for fighters? I don't remember. So when I hit max zoom can I see a fighter further than 8k out? I don't recall that happening.

At what distance can the pilot start to see details of the aircraft? And does zoom increase that distance?

I've seen no magnification happening and It still seems that if the gunsight increases in size at a 1:1 with an aircraft in sight, then everything else also increases, including the pilots head, at a 1:1. The only thing that changes is the amount of fine details.

If someone had the money for a 10' x 15' screen and a super graphics card that can render details so far buried in the coads of AH that they never see the light of day, ...then you would have actual 2.5 magnification.

I'm beggining to believe that the 2.5x you are getting in tanks is also just an illusion.

[715]

All the math you have done still doesn't prove anything to me other than the virtual objects get 2.5x bigger, not that it is actually increasing the pilots vision 2.5x.

If the image is bigger, it has more detail and is easier to see.

Tell me this, at what distance does AH model pilot furthest sighting of another aircraft? 8k for fighters? I don't remember. So when I hit max zoom can I see a fighter further than 8k out? I don't recall that happening.

At what distance can the pilot start to see details of the aircraft? And does zoom increase that distance?

At that range a plane is just a dot, less than one pixel.  AH has a fixed range at which it decides to stop rendering planes independent of zoom.  However, using zoom at ranges somewhat below that can increase detail: a dot turns into something you can identify as, say, Lancs.  I do it all the time.


I'm sorry but I give up.  I can't think of a clearer way to explain this (and I don't want to derail the thread anymore).  <S>

[muzik]

If the image is bigger, it has more detail and is easier to see.

Not trying to be confrontational here, I'm just trying to understand where this magnification is.

Some seem to forget we started playing AH with 100x less detail than real life. So I fail to see 2.5x being a problem when we are still 87.5 in the hole.

At that range a plane is just a dot, less than one pixel.  AH has a fixed range at which it decides to stop rendering planes independent of zoom. 

 

Which apparently proves my point. Objects are visible at fixed ranges. Those ranges are determined by (my assumption) what Htc determined to be "fighter pilot abilities."

If you have a monitor that allowed you to have a 1:1 life size rendition of everything in AH, and you have enough resolution on that screen and in game, then you would see exactly what everyone else sees with full zoom, without you yourself using zoom at all.

8k would be about 4.5 miles. I recently saw someone say Chuck Yeager could pick out dots at 50 miles. Don't know how true, but if he could see dots even half that far he could surely identify an aircraft at 4.5, which makes this...

can increase detail: a dot turns into something you can identify as, say, Lancs.  I do it all the time.

...not unreasonable. Especially bombers. I have seen or heard plenty of accounts by pilots "identifying" aircraft miles away.