Hardcore Arena

[Saxman]

Well what about this then:

Plane is set against a clear blue sky? Full icon range.

Plane ducks into the clouds? Reduced icon range.

Looking down on an aircraft camo'ed against the deck clutter? Reduced icon range.

The problem with the above, though, is how do you handle skins? USN/MC colors would break up the aircraft's outline if you're looking down on it over water but not over land. Vice-versa with aircraft that are varying shades of green or brown. And BMF aircraft are going to be highly visible regardless of the backdrop. And of course the Moo Cow 109 skin sticks out like a sore thumb against anything but snow (which we don't have winter terrains in the Mains). Not to mention aircraft that might have different camo patterns available. IE, what about the F4F, F4U or F6F, which have both USN/MC colors as well as RAF camo patterns? RAF patterns would break up the outline over land but stick out over water, while US would do the opposite.

[Vinkman]

Well what about this then:

Plane is set against a clear blue sky? Full icon range.

Plane ducks into the clouds? Reduced icon range.

Looking down on an aircraft camo'ed against the deck clutter? Reduced icon range.

The problem with the above, though, is how do you handle skins? USN/MC colors would break up the aircraft's outline if you're looking down on it over water but not over land. Vice-versa with aircraft that are varying shades of green or brown. And BMF aircraft are going to be highly visible regardless of the backdrop. And of course the Moo Cow 109 skin sticks out like a sore thumb against anything but snow (which we don't have winter terrains in the Mains). Not to mention aircraft that might have different camo patterns available. IE, what about the F4F, F4U or F6F, which have both USN/MC colors as well as RAF camo patterns? RAF patterns would break up the outline over land but stick out over water, while US would do the opposite.

All creative ideas that that I would support if they could be implemented. Appreciated 

[gyrene81]

rather than "reduced icon range" what about simply change the icons in general and a change in the way icons appear based on distance? there are people with vision impairments that need to be taken into consideration but, there should also be a hard set limit to how large the icons can be made on the player end.

i has idears but, they may end up being too complex for gameplay...      

[Puma44]

Give it up Karnak. These fools are the AvA hijackers that were brainwashed by nrraven and the IL2 converts that have a never-failing pretentious belief that no-icons is the only thing that is realisitc, despite facts, details, historic accounts modern accounts, etc. These are the people that repeatedly turn to insults. The ONLY defense they have is to say "you are less of a person if you don't advocate no-icons" -- and they use this backhanded insult 100% of the time. Even when we've tried to explain the logical fallacy they are using and how this is an insult (even when it's a direct insult) they are so blind they cannot -- literally cannot -- understand they are simply insulting every person that doesn't agree with them. Time and time again many folks on this forum have tried and time and time again they simply ignore it and insult everyone.

And I was NOT exaggerating about IDing plane codes. Many's the time a downed pilot was recognized from a split-second glimpse of his plane, and seeing the codes on it. In a furball, a wild furball with planes zipping around and engaged all around, I've read many accounts where pilots recounted "so and so was up on my right, and I could see what's-his-name on my lower left engaging 2 more, and ahead of me I saw X and Y still in formation, and that's when I saw Z go down without so much as a word" -- this is quite common.

I can see the colors and livery of an airliner flying overhead at 50,000+, but in this game all you can see is a black blob that might vaguely be something with wings. I'm in a residential area that's quite a few miles from a local airport, and under the final approach leg. It's residential, though, so they have to stay a certain altitude up. I can still make out fine details, including oil stains, every detail on landing gears, engines, control surfaces, flaps, the windows, I can see inside the plane if it banks..... All while they're thousands of feet away.

Puma, you're just wrong. Dead flat absurdly wrong. As is Oldman. I'm not talking radar operators that don't know what a plane looks like. I'm talking people that stand in the tower looking out the windows. I'm not making sh** up like you and oldman are. There is actual science at work. The angle of light that hits the eye, the distance of the object, and what details can be distinguished from such things vs pixels on a screen. Somebody even took time to spell out the physics of it on these forums and you AvA hijackers simply ignored it, along with all the first-hand testimonials telling you you're all full of crap. At this point you, Puma, and Oldman, are the equivelant of Gaston and his made-up theories about how flight physics work... booed out of every forum because he religiously believes in things which defy physics, but he proclaims to be correct.

Also, you have absolutely NO right to call Karnak an elitist nor claim he's throwing out insults. EVERY time this conversation comes up the ONLY response from the "AvA vocalists" is to back-handedly insult people by saying you are better than everyone else because you play with no icons. You use key words and catch phrases to cloak your meanings but every time, without fail, you elitists (and that's not an insult, it is the definition of what you are doing) insult every other person no matter how inaccurate your stance or how wrong you are. You jump out of your chair to RALLY to oldman's side because oldman makes an absurd comment: "How do you know? All those guys are dead!" -- without stopping to consider the simply obvious response: Not the guys that shot them down. Not their wingmen. Not everybody else in the battle.

Ink, you're clouding the issues. Simply because you don't think it happened doesn't negate the fact that it happened. Many of Hartman's kills weren't aware he was right behind them. He would often go into a fight right behind an enemy plane, and he recounted "You had to get close, then closer, and closer still, until you thought you might hit" and he was known for firing off just 1 or 2 cannon rounds directly into an occupied P-51's radiator, because he knew that was a sure critical hit for the P-51. That plane would not make it back to base. In 5 minutes it would go down, regardless.

You're also totally clouding historic facts with your own game experiences. No way somebody looking for the enemy isn't going to be looking around? What? Do you even know anything how WW2 combat worked? Squadrons would form up, climb out, have to stay in formation, follow course changes, meet target destinations on a map, all the while spending hours in the air. They didn't know where the enemy was. The enemy could (and often was) already up and looking for them. Through sheer luck one of them will spot the the other first. The vast majority of engagements in WW2 air combat were one group attacking the other unsuspectingly. After that attack (usually after some are shot down) then they know the enemy are there... Usually they would dive away and return home afterwards, and that was the end of their "combat" for the day.

They didn't up a plane, start spraying ammo as soon as they were wheels up, fly for 5 minutes with a death wish, instantly know where the enemy furball was because they had already died in it and knew where it was, and they didn't have 15-20 years of flight experience like Aces High pilots often do. Further, you saying "there's no way they did that, because I don't do that" isn't even a valid argument. You are not them. You want to know how much flight training on-type the Soviet pilots got on the LaGG and Yak-1? 2 hours if they were lucky. 2 hours of flight training and then thrown into combat. They didn't even have combat schools. What they were teaching was how to do the math and how to navigate, and how to operate a high-tech engine system, and what lift is, to people that barely knew what an automobile was. Any combat training they got was sink or swim, or if they happened to get into 1 or 2 units that might already have a smart ace there who takes it upon himself on his own time to teach his fellow pilots. US training was better, but still not good. They trained pilots in the art of flying. They learned how to control their aircraft in all situations... But they didn't know how to teach combat tactics -- not like you might in the DA. You are totally framing the entire debate on your in-game experience. That's just now how it was in WW2.

As for you "They would SEE" -- well no matter how much you wish they would, they didn't. Even later on during Vietnam there's a famous incident where a flight of F-4s were heading home after a sortie and literally passed head-on through a formation of F-4s flying the other way. One one pilot saw it, it was in the blink of an eye. What with radar and all, it shouldn't have happened according to you.

P.S. WW1 pilots scarves were to wipe their goggles, because the engines used castor oil lubricant and it threw oil all over the pilot's face through the normal course of operating. I don't think you know what you're talking about when it comes to aviation history man. Your constant fanaticism againt AH icons further reinforces that notion.

Also, Saxman is quite correct. Icons do not mean you do any less work. Camo does not mean a plane in real life goes unspotted. Camo was stationary to protect a plane from attacks while it was parked. A moving target is vastly easier to see, especially aircraft. The human eye instinctively reacts to motion -- even the slightest of motion. Camo is shattered if the object moves. The belief that "oh, that's why camo was on planes in WW2, because they had no icons!" is absurd. Yet, it is a repeating theme from the AvA hijackers. It's all based on ingnorance of how things work in the real world.



Let me put this in a way that you AvA vocalists would put it.... Maybe YOU are all so obsessed with icons because YOU can't fly by looking at the plane. Maybe you see a neon sign and that grabs your attention like a mag-pie so you can't focus on the target itself? I know *I* don't look at the icon outside of the plane type. I know *I* don't use it for maneuvering and killing. I use it to ID the plane and get rough distance, then once I track the plane I'm barely looking at the icon. In fact I don't even notice it, since I'm looking too closely at the plane itself. So maybe you all just suck because I'm so much better at focusing my attention than you?


Yes... that's about how the AvA lot would phrase it.

Krusty, since you don't spend time in the AvA, you obviously don't know any of the players who frequent it.  None of them consider themselves "elitists" or above anyone else.  You are the only one in the discussion that is name calling and talking down to others.  In fact, it is commonly known on the forums that this is your normal response when losing an argument to fact or reality; emotionally charged name calling, liberal use of insults, and talking down to others from your perch. 

Also, tell us what current, certified commercial airliner is flying overhead your location at 50,000+ feet.

[Megalodon]

INK,

Before the "IdeotNet" that's how people communicated as the standard to express clear vision and ideas. Oral and written transmission of experience directly related to passing on life experiences. In the hope of being helpful when one of your audience waded into the deep end for their turn in a non "IdeiotNet" world.

I'm sorry you don't value communication like so many now on the "IdeiotNet". At least I spent my time in many real aircraft long before this idioet game was a twinkle in anyone's eye. All at the prime age range that today our xBox generation wastes their lives' away trying to become uber sticks in kiddy shoot em up games. I grew up thinking it was normal going to the airfield on weekends with my father or his friends.

I washed, cleaned wind screens and fueled a lot of planes when other kids were reading comics or outside playing. That was the accepted cost for all the free rides I was given. I even worked for a small field one summer pumping gas, cleaning planes and answering the comm. All of the pilots I personally knew and met, valued communication because of the complex ideas associated with flying. Along with the need to keep up with the ongoing changes in information, or their next check ride to keep current, or their next ticket, or their next FAA required check ride, or learning the manual for the next ride they needed a cert in.

Unlike this game where piu, piu, piu is the coin of respect and all you need is a cheap laptop, mouse and $14.95 a month to be some body. When my father was forced to retire in his 60's for a heart problem. He had just finished his next to last check ride in a Citation to become jet certified. The manual he memorized was 6 inches thick just to get into the left seat for the first ride. All of that started in 1960 with him as a Russian language communications sergeant in the USAFSS getting his Silver C at the London Gliding club. Then by the early 80's achieving multiengine commercial instructor level on his own dime, flying commercial cargo, Air Taxi, Air Ambulance and a contract pilot for the FBI. I rode right seat with him a few times on cargo runs in a Beech 18, speaking about complex engine management.

I'll have to ask my mother if he needed to value communication to finally get into that Citation's left seat.

 Don't worry about him Bustr.. at the age you were learning to communicate Ink was cleaning/communicating the/with toilets in Juvenile Detention.


 and  Now a triad of  "My father Beat Me"  "I had to race up to the top of Wilt Chamberlins head and punch him in the face while doing back flips"  and "I'm so stupid I have Ink on my face"


 

[Zoney]

UHOH

[Triton28]

 Don't worry about him Bustr.. at the age you were learning to communicate Ink was cleaning/communicating the/with toilets in Juvenile Detention.


 and  Now a triad of  "My father Beat Me"  "I had to race up to the top of Wilt Chamberlins head and punch him in the face while doing back flips"  and "I'm so stupid I have Ink on my face"


 

[Karnak]

Last comment for me.

Believe me, I wish no icons could be done realistically.  I would very much prefer to have no icons and be able to rely on visual data only, but I am not sure that will ever happen.

So I am not arguing from the standpoint of "icons are good" so much as "icons are, unfortunately, required."

[Puma44]

So, Krusty, what about the 50,000+feet airliners?

[Oldman731]

So, Krusty, what about the 50,000+feet airliners?

Let it go.  Be content to know that WWII pilots were killed because they weren't looking, not because it was hard to spot enemy planes; mid-air collisions do not occur around our airports, because it is not hard to spot other planes; pilots with extensive experience are wrong if they think that is difficult to spot other planes from their cockpits; it is, in fact, easy to lip read at 1000 yards; and anyone who says different is an insulting elitist who has abjured any belief in True Science.

Now get back in your hole.

- oldman

[ink]

(Image removed from quote.)

doesn't help if I have some tard on ignore when he is quoted.....


I see koolaid boy is still yapping his puppy mouth.

[colmbo]

Icons make snap IDs too easy, but no icons is farther from reality than with icons is.

Very true that having icons allows you to aquire a target easier.  Once you've spotted the target (real life) it is much easier to ID than it is in game (without icons).

WWIIOnline had a good idea with the icon that didn't appear unless you looked in one direction for a few seconds.

[Megalodon]

   

Hey have you seen that new show... every time I see it I think of you ...Bad Ink  


Yap,

doesn't help if I have some tard on ignore when he is quoted.....


I see koolaid boy is still yapping his puppy mouth.

Go back to something your good at

what the hell are you talking about :headscratch

I spoke my mind on this subject......wont respond again.

Banging your head,

[jimson]

no icons is simply a request from people that want to pick targets without being seen. They want easy kills with the least amount of effort.

No matter how many times you say it, it still isn't true

[Puma44]

Let it go.  Be content to know that WWII pilots were killed because they weren't looking, not because it was hard to spot enemy planes; mid-air collisions do not occur around our airports, because it is not hard to spot other planes; pilots with extensive experience are wrong if they think that is difficult to spot other planes from their cockpits; it is, in fact, easy to lip read at 1000 yards; and anyone who says different is an insulting elitist who has abjured any belief in True Science.

Now get back in your hole.

- oldman

 .  .