Distant dot removal experiment = Unsuccessful

[Chilli]

Could it be that some folks always seem to have opinions not related to the discussion at hand?     The AvA icon range has long been a discussion.  I see why it was brought up, seeing as icons and dots serve the same purpose, to aid in the lack of visibility. 

Those of you who object to the use of no icons at all, most certainly should "see" how the previous dot range in AH3 was "successful" as a much needed tool to find potential threats and targets.  As I said in my previous post, if I can have it and you have the ability to turn it off, what is the harm?

Funny, because that was the argument given to AvA staffers when they had icons turned off.

I too, have a very strong opinion, but I will see what the result of discussion will render, if anything.  Then, I must do what serves me best. 

[shift8]

Could it be that some folks always seem to have opinions not related to the discussion at hand?     The AvA icon range has long been a discussion.  I see why it was brought up, seeing as icons and dots serve the same purpose, to aid in the lack of visibility. 

Those of you who object to the use of no icons at all, most certainly should "see" how the previous dot range in AH3 was "successful" as a much needed tool to find potential threats and targets.  As I said in my previous post, if I can have it and you have the ability to turn it off, what is the harm?

Funny, because that was the argument given to AvA staffers when they had icons turned off.




I too, have a very strong opinion, but I will see what the result of discussion will render, if anything.  Then, I must do what serves me best. 

Chilli, altering the icon ranges or adding giant dots ruins game play because it unrealistically skews tactics and alters which aircraft features are more and less important. It ends up turning the entire game into a giant meat-grinder where the main deciding factor is more or less whoever is lucky enough to show up last.

While you are correct in stating that real life vision is better than what is produced by a monitor, AH2 and AH3 already have TONS of compensating factors in game. The Icons are already more than sufficient by themselves. The game does not need small battleships for dots at 10 miles distance. It is not realistic at all.

Building SA, and making decisions based on it, is a critical skill set for any fighter pilot.



It is fairly clear however that there is a growing cult inside of this community whose sole desire is to turn the game into a endless mindless fur ball and nothing else.

These people don't like being ambushed.

They don't like someone running from them.

They don't like it when they get shot down by flak.

They don't like it when bombers bomb things that inconvenience them.

They don't like it when someone climbs away from them.

They don't like people who fly higher than whatever altitude they have deemed to be subjectively unreasonable.

They don't like it when people run into flak to avoid a unfair fight.

Or having to deal with any aspect of the game that doesnt fall into a tiny sub-section of cult-approved activities. Which is more or less just flying around in circles on the deck.

Generally speaking, this cult doesn't like anything that results in a battle that isnt either a rolling scissors or a traditional two-circle geometry turning duel. Heaven forbid they not be granted instant SA no matter how careless they may be, because its a cardinal sin to kill them when they are unawares. It is also unspeakable to insinuate the the game play should feature tactical decisions more complicated than choosing between a left or right turn.

You have to wonder why they havent suggested simply giving planes infinite icons that you can see across the map! After all, this would help everyone "find a fight"

Oh wait I have an even better Idea! We have one single map with 3 airfields in a triangle. Then we remove all the  planes in the game except the Hayabusa. Then we put a big concrete sphere around the fields so no one can climb or run. This will also remove all that pesky strategic level stuff from the game. There will be no bombers of course. Then we can all fly around like a bunch of flys next to a lamp post. Sounds fun. 



 

[LCADolby]

Shift8, are you the same name ingame? I gotta fly with you sometime. Your sarcasm is fantastic 

[1stpar3]

And its a wonder that AvA is so full these days! I know the no icons is one of the reasons I don't bother flying there. Another is the few times I did I was dodging HOs. Figured if I had to dodge HOs I might as well stay in the MA as there a LOT more targets.

Playing the "they didn't have that in the war" card doesn't fly <--- pun intended. There are a lot of things that didn't happen in the war as well and many that did that we don't have to deal with , like death and all that stuff.

The GAME makes concessions because it IS and game. The icons and "dots" are a couple of those. I think if they had the smaller dots morph into larger dots, and then in to plane forms it would be nice. Im use to it as it is right now, but the change won't hurt, and may help newbies find a fight.

Absolutely my point! Pretty sure it would be a plus by a great scale! We are trying to get more players,right? This games learning curve is large enough as it is, WITHOUT the old dot rendering. I have turned off a few of the "NERFING" options as I have gotten better, so pretty sure others would as well.

[1stpar3]

Chilli, altering the icon ranges or adding giant dots ruins game play because it unrealistically skews tactics and alters which aircraft features are more and less important. It ends up turning the entire game into a giant meat-grinder where the main deciding factor is more or less whoever is lucky enough to show up last.

While you are correct in stating that real life vision is better than what is produced by a monitor, AH2 and AH3 already have TONS of compensating factors in game. The Icons are already more than sufficient by themselves. The game does not need small battleships for dots at 10 miles distance. It is not realistic at all.

Building SA, and making decisions based on it, is a critical skill set for any fighter pilot.



It is fairly clear however that there is a growing cult inside of this community whose sole desire is to turn the game into a endless mindless fur ball and nothing else.

These people don't like being ambushed.

They don't like someone running from them.

They don't like it when they get shot down by flak.

They don't like it when bombers bomb things that inconvenience them.

They don't like it when someone climbs away from them.

They don't like people who fly higher than whatever altitude they have deemed to be subjectively unreasonable.

They don't like it when people run into flak to avoid a unfair fight.

Or having to deal with any aspect of the game that doesnt fall into a tiny sub-section of cult-approved activities. Which is more or less just flying around in circles on the deck.

Generally speaking, this cult doesn't like anything that results in a battle that isnt either a rolling scissors or a traditional two-circle geometry turning duel. Heaven forbid they not be granted instant SA no matter how careless they may be, because its a cardinal sin to kill them when they are unawares. It is also unspeakable to insinuate the the game play should feature tactical decisions more complicated than choosing between a left or right turn.

You have to wonder why they havent suggested simply giving planes infinite icons that you can see across the map! After all, this would help everyone "find a fight"

Oh wait I have an even better Idea! We have one single map with 3 airfields in a triangle. Then we remove all the  planes in the game except the Hayabusa. Then we put a big concrete sphere around the fields so no one can climb or run. This will also remove all that pesky strategic level stuff from the game. There will be no bombers of course. Then we can all fly around like a bunch of flys next to a lamp post. Sounds fun. 

Not sure if you grasped the intent of this thread? Noone is asking for 10000 mile icons, or any other "CULTISH" ideas. What is wrong with dots visible at field gun ranges? Sure there are alot of things folk complain about, like you listed, but in my humble opinion this isnt one of those things. We are trying to get new players arent we? AH has a big enough learning curve as it is and I certainly dont believe what we are talking about would "NERF" the game play as much as you think it would. I spent countless hours in the BETA and the dot size had very little impact on my survival! Its still the same combat, those that know there plane better, win more. I still got jumped and died just the same. It does help with the frustration factor though, knowing if you had paid attention you would have easily seen that guy diving in from 30k. If it was an option i believe that even those who are poo pooing this idea would still use it. Its not like it would give noobs an advantage anyway. Done correctly, a BMZ attack is hard to dodge no matter what the SA is. Or do you just want easy kills? I could care less about easy kills, its the fun of the fight that keeps me here. In my opinion, the better players get, the better the experience

[Chilli]

Chilli, altering the icon ranges or adding giant dots ruins game play because it unrealistically skews tactics and alters which aircraft features are more and less important. It ends up turning the entire game into a giant meat-grinder where the main deciding factor is more or less whoever is lucky enough to show up last.

While you are correct in stating that real life vision is better than what is produced by a monitor, AH2 and AH3 already have TONS of compensating factors in game. The Icons are already more than sufficient by themselves. The game does not need small battleships for dots at 10 miles distance. It is not realistic at all.

Building SA, and making decisions based on it, is a critical skill set for any fighter pilot.



It is fairly clear however that there is a growing cult inside of this community whose sole desire is to turn the game into a endless mindless fur ball and nothing else.

These people don't like being ambushed.

They don't like someone running from them.

They don't like it when they get shot down by flak.

They don't like it when bombers bomb things that inconvenience them.

They don't like it when someone climbs away from them.

They don't like people who fly higher than whatever altitude they have deemed to be subjectively unreasonable.

They don't like it when people run into flak to avoid a unfair fight.

Or having to deal with any aspect of the game that doesnt fall into a tiny sub-section of cult-approved activities. Which is more or less just flying around in circles on the deck.

Generally speaking, this cult doesn't like anything that results in a battle that isnt either a rolling scissors or a traditional two-circle geometry turning duel. Heaven forbid they not be granted instant SA no matter how careless they may be, because its a cardinal sin to kill them when they are unawares. It is also unspeakable to insinuate the the game play should feature tactical decisions more complicated than choosing between a left or right turn.

You have to wonder why they havent suggested simply giving planes infinite icons that you can see across the map! After all, this would help everyone "find a fight"

Oh wait I have an even better Idea! We have one single map with 3 airfields in a triangle. Then we remove all the  planes in the game except the Hayabusa. Then we put a big concrete sphere around the fields so no one can climb or run. This will also remove all that pesky strategic level stuff from the game. There will be no bombers of course. Then we can all fly around like a bunch of flys next to a lamp post. Sounds fun. 

So, then do you fit into the category of folks who do not want others to:

Avoid being ambushed.

Choose the fight they engage in with adequate pertinent information. 

Adequately identify bombers and relative altitude not requiring satellite images from space.

Adequately identify potential threat and E state as "real life vision" would offer.

Adequately "see" number and position of aircraft in the vicinity so there is never a surprise of an unfair fight.

Again, what is the harm, if this is NOT your intention?  I pose this as a rhetorical question, because although I am not familiar with your handle, I do not believe that is your intent, but a lot of good intentions have resulted in a whole lot of bad decisions. 

I merely am of the opinion that HiTech should have stuck with the model that we were first given with dot visibility.  Others have suggested that the dots should have had different sizes (as the planes do once they render).  What I am left with is nothing like the "game" that I have played for over a dozen years.  I guess the horde wins and eny loses in this version that I am seeing.

[LCADolby]

What I am left with is nothing like the "game" that I have played for over a dozen years.  I guess the horde wins and eny loses in this version that I am seeing.

This is wrong. The dots AH3 released with were massive and out at a ridiculous range, way more visible than any dot on AH2. Not only that at a certain distance the dot would vanish leaving you wondering where it went until the offending target got much closer; leaving a blind period. But worse than that; it was unimmersive, when looking at a horde from range damn distracting which leads to my next one, bloody ugly to look at.

What you are left with now that has been fixed, is very close to AH2 if not just as was AH2.
It's much better now; single cons yes are hard to spot as they should be and hordes are still easy to spot as they should be.
If you are having trouble now, it means you were having trouble back then in AH2.

[Lusche]

The dots AH3 released with were massive and out at a ridiculous range, way more visible than any dot on AH2. Not only that at a certain distance the dot would vanish leaving you wondering where it went until the offending target got much closer; leaving a blind period. But worse than that; it was unimmersive, when looking at a horde from range damn distracting which leads to my next one, bloody ugly to look at.

That's about what I meant with "irritating" 

[100Coogn]

I always felt the icons should fade in/out, the closer/further away other players were.
Seems as though it would add a little immersion, as players far away would have very dim icons.

Coogan

[LCADolby]

I always felt the icons should fade in/out, the closer/further away other players were.
Seems as though it would add a little immersion, as players far away would have very dim icons.

Coogan

Turn on AA and all icons are dim, blending in with everything around them.

[Tilt]

Maybe the odd (random) reflective flash at the extreme dot range............ basically if you see it you know something is there but have no real idea as to direction of travel or even how many maybe there.............

[captain1ma]

with the bigger ah3 beta icons, I thought it was a nice balance so that you could go without icons and yet see the bad guys at the same time. just in case, in the AVA, we always keep the Radar full on. This way you get a balance of gameplay, realism and even new guys can learn to enjoy it. its helpful to everyone.

[Chilli]

Maybe the odd (random) reflective flash at the extreme dot range............ basically if you see it you know something is there but have no real idea as to direction of travel or even how many maybe there.............

   Anything but clear blue skies until something is in your backyard. 

Dolby, maybe you feel like these MONSTER dots will mess up your films, therefore what would it HARM, if you were able to turn them off and not see them?  Same question Snailman?

I agree Jaeger, it would work with no icons, except they go from very visible to almost invisible once they reach whatever range the game is set to actually render the shape.  So, the dots wouldn't help with much other than what I am proposing, faster recognition of distant threats and targets.  Once the actual aircraft renders its shape the dot is not as noticeable.

 

[LCADolby]

  Anything but clear blue skies until something is in your backyard. 

Dolby, maybe you feel like these MONSTER dots will mess up your films, therefore what would it HARM, if you were able to turn them off and not see them?  Same question Snailman?



 

I never thought about that, good point, it would crapola films.
But in answer to your question, is along the lines of unfair advantage. One of the reasons given to why I cant have mirrors.

[shift8]

So, then do you fit into the category of folks who do not want others to:

Avoid being ambushed.

Choose the fight they engage in with adequate pertinent information. 

Adequately identify bombers and relative altitude not requiring satellite images from space.

Adequately identify potential threat and E state as "real life vision" would offer.

Adequately "see" number and position of aircraft in the vicinity so there is never a surprise of an unfair fight.

Again, what is the harm, if this is NOT your intention?  I pose this as a rhetorical question, because although I am not familiar with your handle, I do not believe that is your intent, but a lot of good intentions have resulted in a whole lot of bad decisions. 

I merely am of the opinion that HiTech should have stuck with the model that we were first given with dot visibility.  Others have suggested that the dots should have had different sizes (as the planes do once they render).  What I am left with is nothing like the "game" that I have played for over a dozen years.  I guess the horde wins and eny loses in this version that I am seeing.

I want players to have a reasonable ability to build SA and do the above things. I am not in favor of unreasonable crutches for players who cannot use the already more than abundant tools for this. These tools should be geared towards compensating for differences between computer screens and IRL, NOT excessively gamey mechanics that alter the combat beyond any reasonable recognition.

The big dots were simply not realistic. Period. The dots as the are now, the ah2 dots, are much more realistic. You can spot a plane out to ten miles or so, but it gets smaller and small until the point it disappears. So at the max range you are less likely to spot several planes, and you will have a harder time keeping track of very distant contacts that are spread apart. This is how it works in real life. The giant dots both give unreasonably easy individual spotting and they also give ludicrous capacity to spot everything at once, without error, and without effort. 



The dot model should stay as it was in AH2. They were plenty visible then. Having the freight train dots is just plain stupid. It creates an environment where every battle just a conveyor belt of doom. Where every battle is simply the result of who managed to show up to the fight last. This basically obliterates tactics, and turns everything into a crap shoot.

The harm btw, is rather obvious. I mean how is this a serious question? Turning the "big dots" off is not just an immersion thing. It alters how the game plays. It not fair to insist that some players let others have some giant cheat and then pretend that the players who dont like this should go screw themselves and just turn it off. As if the two things are somehow just cosmetic.