Why it is not possible to have a padlock.

[-lynx-]

>I had this conversation with a combat pilot >and here's a snippet of some usefull >information:
>
>
>quote:
>
>"[blackhawk] I have NOT lost sight of a >tally in either situation. Ever. Some >pilots did in training, but I say with >confidence not 1 man in the 152nd TRS would >lose a tally in the weeds, or even in the >sun in ACM."

I'm sorry Kats - from my personal experience this sounds like BS. The whole thing looks like a snippet from a propaganda movies of the 40s.

It's very difficult to acquire another plane, especially at distance and even more so over terrain. It's very easy to "lose" the plane you were staring at just a second ago. The whole technique of scanning the skies around you if very much like AW/WB/AH view system - you select a sector, make sure there's nothing dangerous there, "snap" to the next sector and so on.

When you move you head around everything moves relative to your point of view making it it virtually impossible to separate between "moving" landscape and a plane moving against the landscape.

It might be different in a dogfight where your opponent is very close and you can "predict" his position with relative ease based on him moving under the same laws of physics as yourself (no warps in RL...). From this point of view optional padlock might be OK.

All padlocks I've tried before made me feel disoriented. You don't need to "see" your attitude in RL - you feel where your plane is going relative to the rest of the world. In a flightsim - you need to "know" where you're going... I cant' see padlock helping it any.

It's given as an option - you don't like it, don't use it. I trust HTC to make it a "good", "realistic" padlock - they've delivered so far.

Just one request: guys, if you implement it - make "locking" distance limited to 300-400 yards max, like it is in RL.

------------------
-lynx-
13 Sqn RAF

[This message has been edited by -lynx- (edited 07-28-2000).]

[popeye]

Andy,

As others have said, the issue is not about which view system is more realistic, it's about replacing a learned skill with an automated system.  I think you'll agree that SA is one of the most important factors in the game.  Some are concerned that padlock will amount to "automated SA".

You say that it doesn't matter how the bandit is tracked, the pilot with superior BFM skills will win.  Let's imagine HTC decided that too many potential players were discouraged by having to learn BFM, so they introduced automatic systems for flaps, trim, and rudder.  Now you can say, it doesn't matter how the plane is flown, the pilot with superior gunnery skills will win.  Now, let's imagine that too many potential players are discouraged by having to learn gunnery....

I don't know how the new padlock system will work, but I would hope that it will not be "automated SA".  A system that provides a quick start for newbies, but still rewards those who develop SA skills would be fine with me, and (I suspect) most "hardcore" players.

I'm confident that HTC has put a lot of thought into this.  It'll be interesting to see how it pans out.  

popeye

[Andy Bush]

DW6

RL fighters don't have 'outside' views...only their pilots do.

I have gone into considerable detail to explain this in my 'Perspectives' series of articles...too much to go into here.

Here's a brief summary. RL fighter pilots are taught BFM using an 'outside' perspective. The 'player to target' external view is exactly how a RL fighter pilot is taught to see the three dimensional BFM situation.

That is why the instructor uses models or his hands to describe a maneuver rather than drawing cockpit-based views.

Andy

[This message has been edited by Andy Bush (edited 07-28-2000).]

[-sudz-]

I think some of you are forgetting the features already in AH that take the burden off the pilot:  auto-pilot, auto-takeoff, bomber gun aiming (for the guns not currently manned).  I think we can all agree that the auto-pilot is essential, I had some problems with the auto-takoff being implemented but now use it regularly, and I wouldn't even take a bomber up if the auto-aim wasn't implemented.

The cool thing is, no pilot is required to use auto-pilot or auto-takeoff.  If the same applies to the padlock view then I'm alright with it.

-sudz-

[Andy Bush]

popeye

I agree with you.

But, as far as BFM is concerned, SA ends with the tally.

Before anyone goes screaming into the night, please note my emphasis on the 'BFM'. I'm referring to tactical maneuvering where the focus is on the bandit...not the big picture 'how am I doing' where the focus is placed on the overall strategic situation.

Whatever means is used to track the target after the tally is obtained is pretty much irrelevant as long as no grossly inappropriate mechanisms exist (such as a padlock continuing to track in an area where the pilot cannot see).

I think we get lost here in the 'big picture-little picture' issue. Padlock should be a 'little picture' visual aid...snap views are more suited to 'big picture' perspectives.

Andy

[Kats]

 

Part of the hardcore is keeping track of the enemy on yer own, not
                          letting a computer take over the taskload.

So why do you not complain about ICONS with their comupter aided range finders? Listen guys, we get visually screwed in these games due to dimensional amd scale issues. That is why we don't complain about ICONS or PL's. Even with them, our viewing is STILL impaired compared to our real life counterparts.

As far as how you aquire a target, IMO there is absolutely nothing wrong with cycling from nearest to furthest target that is within your LOS. In real life I could do it instantly, and be able to visually cycle all targets much much faster than any padlock system. I could also track multiple cons in a real world situation quite easily whereas a padlock system hardly comes close to that.

Tracking targets is not SA IMO, and it isn't much of a real world skill. SA is to be able to visualize your enviroment 3 moves in the future and use that info to place yourself in the most advantageous position. No viewing system can replace this skill. This is the skill that separates the great pilot from the average pilot. It is the same in sports, Gretzky's greatness wasn't his size, or raw talent, nor was it because he could see where the players on the ice were any differently than the other players. His greatness was that as in chess, he played the game 5 moves ahead - he saw where the game was going to be  30 seconds in the future and took complete advantage!  

As far as PL's and Snap viewing in games are concerned, all we are trying to do is find a way to manually simulate something that comes naturally and easily to all of us by virtue of being a human. Turning eyesite, head, neck, and shoulder movement into a required skill makes no sense to me. I'd preffer learning engine management, navigation, and a host of other skills that are a required skill to be a pilot, that most sims currently ignore.

[Rattler]

Kats,

I've complained about ICONS.....alot.

I've also been toying with these sims since  Air Warrior was available only on DOS.

I've also been driving to work every week for the last 10 years by a major Airport with all sizes of aircraft.

I'll spot an aircraft MUCH closer than when ICON range starts in AH. And,in real life when I spot these larger shapes flying in the air and track for 4 to 5 seconds,then glance back down to the road/my speed, then glance back up to re-aquire that same aircraft.... I'll be damned! where did it go?

I always have a squeak of a time to find it again, then when I do,its the same relative size it was before, just a tad higher in the sky.

I can find,track,and re-aquire virtual aircraft without icons better than real life.

And as a result,I will not accept PL till its done in a manner that doesn't provide a crutch along with what it fixs.

Its plane & simple.

Rattler

[Skuzzy]

Gee whiz guys, maybe folks just did not understand what Pyro and HT said about the system.  Allow me to quantify;

1)  The PL is an augmentation of the current view system.  i.e. is does not work automatically, it requires YOU to get a manual line-of-sight visual fix on the target and then press a key to lock the target(? workin from memory HT).

Once locked, AND you do not manually change your view so that the acquired target is not in view, your head will turn through the same motions as your manual view system is.  The head turns do not keep the plane centered, but only change when the acquired target reaches the edge of your periphery view.

If you manually change your view and lose visual with the target, you must manually find the target again before the PL starts to work again.

If an obstruction of the target,that is PL'ed, occurs, your view will no longer automatically change and you will again have to manually get sight of your target again, before the PL takes over.

All this assumes you have enabled the PL AND have acquired a visual on the target AND you have not manually switched views so the target is no longer in line of sight.

This system is the best compromise between the way it really works in RL and the way it HAS worked in other sims and best of all, it does not have to be used.  It is simply quite ingenious.

Pyro, HT, if I stepped on any toes, I apologize, but the mole hill was starting to look like Mt. Everest.  


------------------
Roy "Skuzzy" Neese
President, AppLink Corp.
http://www.applink.net
skuzzy@applink.net

[Nash]

Thanks Skuzzy.

Say... can ya tell us just *how* a target is selected? If ya got 3 nme in front of ya, hitting "p" or whatever aint  gonna do it.

Thanks.

[JimBear]

Thanks Skuzzy,  the one fear i had was that Pad could be set and then you could look around to your hearts desire, and then pop back onto the padded target.  Shoulda known better  

Over and Out

[Kats]

 

And as a result,I will not accept PL till its done in a manner that doesn't provide a crutch along with what it fixs.

                          Its plane & simple.

Well, I'm not going to argue with you. All I can say is talk to a real pilot - they will tell you the exact opposite. I guess you missed an earlier post in this thread where I quoted an interview I had discussing the very issues you describe. I'll repost it:

 

"[blackhawk] I have NOT lost sight of a tally in either situation. Ever. Some  pilots did in training, but I say with confidence not 1 man in the 152nd TRS would lose a tally in the weeds, or even in the sun in ACM."

Of course, as been stated - it all depends on what kind of PL system we are talking about.

[easymo]

 The views in AH have always been very generous. I cant remember the last time i lost the position of a con(or cons). It makes it hard to understand what perpose the addition will serve.

 It is nearly impossibile to imagine how you can make anything easier, without it giveing an edge. Auto take off, outside views, easymode. All of these things give an edge to the user. They use to argue that esymode in WB didnt give an edge. Then they took it out of the main, and 70 percent of the players moved to the ACA.( laffed my bellybutton off on that one).

 In the end, it will be available to everyone. So what the hell. The game has gotten easyer. Worse things could happen. WB gunnery for example .

[Skuzzy]

 

Originally posted by Nash:
Thanks Skuzzy.

Say... can ya tell us just *how* a target is selected? If ya got 3 nme in front of ya, hitting "p" or whatever aint  gonna do it.

Thanks.

Not sure about that.  HT would have to offer that up.



------------------
Roy "Skuzzy" Neese
President, AppLink Corp.
http://www.applink.net
skuzzy@applink.net

[hblair]

OK, almost a year since it was introduced. How many of you guys use it? Does it help you?

I, for one, never did mess with it. I was already comfortable doing it the "old-fashioned" way.

One thing that is interesting, is seeing all the scared pups in this thread (including me).

Anyone having luck with padlock?

[R4M]

Never tried it. Hell, I dont use padlock anymore in neither of the sims I have,I really like the view system in AH (xcept for the linda blair 6 view)!!!