Radar, the realism thrown out the window.

[-lynx-]

Hmmm... Errr... Just wondering if I missed a patch or something - my map is so NOT detailed so "pin-point locating of the enemy" sounds like some kind of fiction to me.

It would undoubtedly work just the way you guys describe had we had the Brand W style map... We don't so please stop wasting bandwidth/energy - the global warming is upon us and you are contributing  

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

[Mitsu]

Enemy/Friendly symbols should be seen only on the ground.
I don't like to see symbols at the in-flight.  

[Hristo]

And maybe this is a signal that we need Historical Arena ASAP.

With historical matchups, reduced icons and no radar.

[Downtown]

You know you fly too much when you think you just have to hit the / key and start typing.

I spent four of five seconds, just stareing at the screen, wondering why the text box to post a reply did not appear.

Then I saw the Post Reply Icon Button, and a bell rang.

-Lynx-

For Version 0.39 you can see enemy plane icons on your map in flight.  These are displayed as Little RED dots.

In Version 0.38 Freindly Icons were displayed as little green dots.

Pin Point may be a stretch, and the Radar Does not give alt.

AND during the war there were ground controllers who could feed data to pilots in the air on the Location, and direction of Enemy Aircraft.  Many could give you a good height estimate also.

But the Radar of that period was very fickle, and I think more inaccurate than what we have now.

I think the Radar we have now is great if all you are looking to do is furball.

Apparenly it will allow someone to sneek a C-47 in below 1000Ft.

But I haven't heard any limitation on Altitude for this Radar.

Even Modern Radar has an Effect Ceiling of about 35,000 Feet, that is why the AWACS Fly at 35,000 and provide coverage up to 65,000 Ft.

Hampering the Radar will provide realistic feedback.

Give them a range, say 50 miles.

Targets at extreme range should be fuzzy, and their postion should be grossly inaccurate on the Radar.

As a target closes on the Radar, the Radar should have a clearer picture of what is approaching.

Also, Radar can't see into canyons, valleys Etc, unless it is positioned above such natural obstacles.  The same should be true of AH.  The forward fields are close to that mountain range.  Radars located at those airfields should not be able to see much across that mountain range.

I don't mind the radar, but I feel right now it is tooooooOOOOOO accurate.

------------------
"I could feel the 20MM Cannon impacting behind me so I made myself small behind the pilot armor" Charlie Bond AVG
lkbrown1@tir.com
 http://www.tir.com/~lkbrown1
Very Opinionated Person.

[Vermillion]

I am with Nath, I was really disappointed with the new Radar feature just implemented.  It was one of the reasons I left AW, because SA didn't mean crap.

Please, keep the sector counter, get rid of the inflight radar.

Oh and before some of you guys keep pressing for a "Historical Arena" can we try and get a full regular arena first and get the beta finished?  How can we test 3 way strat and combat if its 95% of the time a two way war.

------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires "

[leonid]

I for one was very pleased with the threatened sector icon, since it warned any entering the sector that enemy aircraft were in the area.  And by lengthening the bar the seriousness of the threat could be conveyed as well.  That the location of the enemy was no more detailed than within a given sector was an excellent method of simulating various reports in the area of reported air activity.

This new radar that is part of 0.39 certainly appears to work fine, however whether it should be available for inflight usage is something I would discourage, since it would be unrealistic for the time period depicted.  It certainly has a use for scenarios where radar figured heavily like the Battle of Britain and the strategic bomber campaigns.

I do like the idea of the tower's integrity being directly linked to the coverage of radar in that vicinity, since destruction of a radar command center would be just as debilitating as damage to the radar array itself.

[leonid]

double post - sorry

[This message has been edited by leonid (edited 11-20-1999).]

[SMERSH]

I totally agree, this is extremely strange that Hitech implemented such all knowing all seeing ??RADAR?? in all aircraft including fighters??? WTH?

It's just as surprising as if Hitech decided to arm all the aircraft in AH with futuristic Star Wars lazer canons. Just doesn't make any sense at all.

You can't combine Quakebirdlike dweebery features like all seeing radar in all AC while implementing hardcore flight models/ gunnery. You'll just p*ss off both the hardcore flight simmers and the Quakebirders alike and no one will want to play AH.

And NO NO NO padlocking! Learn to use the view system and stop whining. Or else play Novalogic sims. Heck, even my dog could play Novalogic sims after 2 mins of practice.

I think some explanation for this strange event is warranted from Hitech.

[Thzone]

Ok, you guys want realism?  Get in a plane, go up.  If you get shot down, leave the computer and never play again because in a sense, you are dead.  If you don't, well good for you.

[Azrael]

Inflight radar is a step backwards, IMHO.

Az

------------------
Azrael
XO 487th BG (Heavy)
'The Gentlemen from Hell'

[Nash]

The comment "Who want's to take up a 17 to 30k only to be shot down because someone can see your location" has me a little confused as this statement was intended to protect the 'realism' of a radarless arena. It only points out how _unrealistic_ our engagements are currently.

If you don't want to get shot down, maybe bring another buff with you for support. Hell, bring 4 or 5, 10 of em even.. and fly inna tight defensive formation. Oh yah, but this radar now is going to (unrealistically?) convey the nature of this threat to the enemy infrastructure. Of course they will be met with heavy fighter opposition. What to do? Hmm.. How about some fighter escorts? Some
close, some high, and perhaps some out ahead to sweep.

Golly, this is shaping up to resemble a 'realistic' air battle.

I don't know if it is because of years of flying arena sims that people are defending any change to the status quo as it relates to the engagements as they are flown, day after day, the same. But I just find it odd that some make the claim of 'unrealistic' in the same sentence that they protect the sanctity of the stealthy lone B17 flying deep into enemy territory or the single 47 flying through the back door to take over a base.

Not to mention the go find a furball and dive in mentality. Is it _that_ that some would like to protect? How? How does dar as it is today foiling these? How could it be that my countrymen are engaged in such a manner, and I wouldn't know its location?

So most likely, yes, this will change the way you go about flying in the arena. This unrealistic dar could ironically have the effect of bringing about realistic engagements, and better overall strat.

And again, the problem (if you see it that way)isn't anything a well placed 500lber couldn't solve.

[By-Tor]

 Very well said Nash-agree completely with all you've stated-especially the using b-17's in a tight formation for protection.I've(with varied success) attacked formations as small as 2 b-17"s and it is VERY dangerous fare to a single fighter.Now-3 or more would be a REAL defensive snarl and that(as you said) would require a sizeable and coordinated fighter defence to tackle!That is as realistic as it gets I'd think and if current radar aplication facilitates this scenario-sounds like alot of fun to me!

[Grumpy]

Well, the dots didn't make THAT much difference to me last night

At least it didn't prevent Voss (and his wingie) from making a meal of me <g>

From a historical POV though, I'm leery of
eye-in-the-sky radar...I'd like to see 'dar
implemented for scenarios but only so that a
player could actually act as the ground controller (but not fly at the same time)

maybe radar should be added as a "plane type"
or in multi-place planes, as an "observer"
position where that plane DID have onboard
radar.

For single-seat fighters, I'd rather see a
text message (or a sound file triggered by
a text message) that calls out planes that
are actually likely to have been observed
(ie by radar stations, naval units etc)
that would give GENERAL locations (including
altitude) but would only be given intermittently, so the pilot would be forced to plot a likely intercept based on each report.

If the map ever gets drawn more clearly or
gets an inflight "zoom" feature like WB, I'd
vote for the dots to be left out.

Grump

[jmccaul]

Personally i perfered it when there were just sector counters.

Perhaps an explanation for hitech putting in this sort of radar is just to test to see if it works so if an arena/scenario may require them they would be available (e.g. a night time scenario)

[Wardog]

Radar should only be accessable in the tower. Not in the AC. The only exception to this would be AC that was equiped with onboard dar.

I do not & never have liked the idea of onboard Radar in any sim unless its used in the correct AC.

------------------
--wd-- Jagdgeschwader 26 "Schlageter"
            "The Abbeville Boys"