Icons for GV's

[onan]

Here it is:

All the below pertain to the relevent "icon".

Planes can see planes*
Planes can see friendly GV's, Whilst the GV engine is on or off
Planes can't see enemy GV's, whilst the GV engine is off
Planes can see enemy GV's, whilst the GV engine is on

*Planes can't see enemy planes, whilst plane is on ground, stationary and engine off.
(might be useful to avoid being vulched. ie, taking off from the hanger instead of runway.  Also when
landing Goons)

GV's can see planes
GV's can't see enemy planes which have landed and stationary, with engine off
Gv's can see friendly GV's

Final offer<S>

KlunK

[AWwrgwy]

And I'll clue you in on something, take it from a guy who spends a lot of time in IL2s, most of the time its your fire that we see first. Not your icon. When a base alerts and there is a spawn in, as well as no dar-bar, it means GVs are inbound. It might be a sneak coming flying low but most of the time its a GV IB.

And they are so easy to find not because of their icons but because the tank drivers, %95 of the time, will drive a straight line directly to the base or town. Even if you took the icons away that would still happen. WWs almost always start shooting from way out of range and with tracers on. Had they just waited, turned tracers off, until my low IL2 was 1,000 away before shooting a lot of times I'd have been a dead duck.

...And, movement in general.  If the dot I see is moving, I'm pretty sure it's not a bush.  Mostly it's just a matter of following the origin of tracers though.


wrongway

[BnZs]

Huh.  I guess that is why the Army paints the Abrams bright pink, it just doesn't matter for visibility....

Oh wait.

The fact remains that taking away GV icons would unrealistically compromise the ability one would actually have to observe and identify GVs.

That 109 we're able to identify at 6,000 yards is also camo-painted...

[ScatterFire]

The fact remains that taking away GV icons would unrealistically compromise the ability one would actually have to observe and identify GVs.

That 109 we're able to identify at 6,000 yards is also camo-painted...

You are being purposely obtuse  

Fact is, that 109 at 6 km away from you would still be just as visible without the icon, you just wouldn't know it was an enemy.  6 km away a GV can identify another GV also, though again it doesn't know it is an enemy or not.

That plane moving 6km away is visible to an enemy plane, and a GV moving across open area 6 km away is just as visible.  The difference is a GV, sitting still with its engine off, in heavy trees, deploying camo and actively trying to hide is JUST as visible as one moving over open terrain.  That is what is wrong.

My preferred solution: remove ALL icons from enemies.  Friendly icons would still show, so you know who you are shooting at.  GVs do this now, why not planes also?  TIme to learn gunnery and ACM without having little icons telling you exactly what your firing solution is.  No more lining up a tank's main gun on an IL2 and waiting precisely until 800 yrds to fire, knowing you will hit every time.  No more seeing hiding GVs through heavy trees unless they are moving.  No more sitting there in a plane knowing exactly what you are up against until you get into combat range and can physically identify them.

Course my hit percentage would drop further, but so would every one else's....

[trigger2]

You are being purposely obtuse  

Fact is, that 109 at 6 km away from you would still be just as visible without the icon, you just wouldn't know it was an enemy.

Then I'll assume you can identify all of the aircraft in this screenshot, the furthest A/C is at d600.



If you guessed la5, seafire, and another zero, then I stand corrected, but to me, they look like everything else, and the zero at d600? Looks like a dot.

[ScatterFire]

Then I'll assume you can identify all of the aircraft in this screenshot, the furthest A/C is at d600.

(Image removed from quote.)

If you guessed la5, seafire, and another zero, then I stand corrected, but to me, they look like everything else, and the zero at d600? Looks like a dot.

And your point is?  I said you can SEE the aircraft, just not tell whether they are friend or foe. I never said you could get a 100% ID on what it is, just that it was visible.  Just like you could SEE the GV in open terrain without the icon, just not tell if it was friend of foe.

But right now you can SEE the GV hiding in the thickest woods, get a 100% ID on it AND know its exact range.  While it isn't moving, has its engine turned off, sitting in the thickest thicket in the game and while painted the exact color of the brush around it.

My original post was in regard to being able to easily see vehicles on the ground, to which I say BS if they are purposely trying to hide from an aircraft AND have the tools to do it.  A GV hiding in the woods shouldn't have a glowing "Here I am" red neon sign above them to assist planes.  Other GVs don't get it, why should planes?

And no, I don't care if you remove the range icons from enemy planes at the same time.

[AWwrgwy]

And your point is?  I said you can SEE the aircraft, just not tell whether they are friend or foe. I never said you could get a 100% ID on what it is, just that it was visible.  Just like you could SEE the GV in open terrain without the icon, just not tell if it was friend of foe.

I believe his point is, in real life, at 600 yards you can identify the aircraft and tell who is friend or foe.

In real life, it takes many, many more pixels to render an real object.  In game, we have icons.

 


wrongway

[ScatterFire]

I believe his point is, in real life, at 600 yards you can identify the aircraft and tell who is friend or foe.

In real life, it takes many, many more pixels to render an real object.  In game, we have icons.

 


wrongway

I'll give you (and him) that.

In real life while flying a single-seat fighter you wouldn't see that tank at 6k away, hiding in the brush under camo, no matter how good your eyes are.

In game we have icons 

[BnZs]

I'll give you (and him) that.

In real life while flying a single-seat fighter you wouldn't see that tank at 6k away, hiding in the brush under camo, no matter how good your eyes are.

In game we have icons 

You do not see GV icons at 6K.

You see them at 1.5K.

You've hit upon an area where icons are imperfect. Tiger in an open field? Damn right you'd see them a mile away. In dense cover with an elaborate job of camoflaging it? You might pass 50 yards away without seeing it.

Reality usually lies somewhere in between. Hence the shorter GV icons from the air.

[Tilt]

I think its the nature of the icon that seems unreal. A Gv in open country side is spotable at considerable range (black dots can be picked up).

We then have to fly close to identify them via icon. This aspect of the icon I do not have a problem with. it is used for identification purposes.

A GV in a wooded area is not easily spoted. Yet if we fly within icon range the icon pops up waving its bright red flag say hey I'm over here!! come bomb/strafe me. We would not have located the GV any other way and neither does this represent an actuality. GV's should be able to hide successfully (in dense cover) from airborne observation.

Addressing the icon it would be neat if objects masked it more thoroughly in some way such that not only should we have line of sight to the GV origin point but also a considerable distance either side before the icon pops up.

I think switching the enemy icon on/off under certain conditions could work toward it. I would favour motion as the switch rather than engine on/off. Motion is something that reveals other wise well comoflaged stuff to the observer.

Another option could just be camoflage. Allow a GV to dig in erect camo netting and hide its self. The erection and removal has a time penalty but causes its icon dissappear.

We then have to think of a way to remove these advantages from the spawn camper! or at least remove the sapwn camper altogether

[onan]

I think the Spawn camper is always going to be a part of this game anyway, icons or not.  That's just the way some people play.  Like the jerks who shoot down 'chutes.
(press 'O' when you can count the branches).
The camper is using a part of the way the game is set up to his advantage. 
When in RL would a GV magically appear, time after time and in the same place?
Maybe ask for a cargo type plane which could drop GV's on chutes(next wish).
Sure there was one in WW2(don't know what it was).
Do away with spawns? NO!!!
Make the spawn area bigger, more random?
Back to the icon thing though.  Just finished an hour in LWBlue.
Got near to an enemy base, parked up in a blown up barn.  Engine off.
Had a good view of what I needed to see.
Got spotted from the air(maybe because of the icon above my head. not sure).
Spit drops a bomb. Missed.
GV's getting close.
Il2 throws cannon rounds. Am tracked.
GV's fire at the barn I'm in. Am Turreted.
Another bomb from a Spit.  Dead.

Would anyone have known that I was in the barn without the icon giving my cover away?
I never fired a shot and my engine was off.

All the crap about- "can see this or that from 6k away" and GV icons are "very fair" just don't cut for me.

KlunK

[BnZs]

All the crap about- "can see this or that from 6k away" and GV icons are "very fair" just don't cut for me.

KlunK

"I don't like getting killed" trumps logic aye?

GV'ers will always face the problem that they are overwhelmingly out-numbered by people who want to fly, and the fact that GVs were and are very vulnerable to air attack. This does not justify some guy in a Tiger (or, more to the point, a wirbel) asking to be invisible when airplanes that are tiny by comparison have neon signs hanging over them.

[onan]

"I don't like getting killed" trumps logic aye?

GV'ers will always face the problem that they are overwhelmingly out-numbered by people who want to fly, and the fact that GVs were and are very vulnerable to air attack. This does not justify some guy in a Tiger (or, more to the point, a wirbel) asking to be invisible when airplanes that are tiny by comparison have neon signs hanging over them.

 BnZs
 It's been suggested that icons would still be visible whilst the GV's are moving/engine on.
 Most planes are not tiny by comparison

GV's would still be vunerable from the air, icon/no icon.

KlunK

[BnZs]

 BnZs
 It's been suggested that icons would still be visible whilst the GV's are moving/engine on.
 Most planes are not tiny by comparison

GV's would still be vunerable from the air, icon/no icon.

KlunK

Engine on/off is irrelevant and shouldn't make a difference. In R/L (unlike the game, *sigh*) pilots wouldn't kill their engines to listen for GV noise.

Tanks in this game have about the same bulk as WWII fighters. If you can spot one on the ground, you can spot the other.

Take away the icons from GVs btw, and the gheyery of flak draggin' will become far worse than it is now.

I'm sorry, I'm not an "anti-GV" guy,(I think the 37MM option on the IL2 should carry a light perk) but until you do literally have the ability to dig in around your tank and spread camouflage netting and what have you the game, there is no justification for changing the icons, other than whining about the fact that being under jabos and attack planes in a GV sucks. Well, it does suck, but it sucked in WWII also.

[Rich46yo]

While I understand these wishes, and believe those proposing them simply want to improve the game. I think the end product would be the game wouldnt be improved by removing icons. The simple fact is, and Im getting back to the original post, that its unrealistic to expect you should be able to motor in alone, in a Panzer-IV, to an enemy air base and not get pulverized by air power.

There is no Historical comparison to suggest otherwise. Single tanks simply did not deploy like that in actual war and no tank commander in his right mind would have tried. Armor worked best support by friendly air cover, flak, and artillary. A weak link in an enemies front line would be penetrated and off the GV columns would go.

You talked about all the care you took deploying to the base without admiting the deployment itself was flawed. Ive made some suggestions that would energize the GV war but didnt get much support for it. Instead we keep getting threads wishing for no icons or gelded attack airplanes.

Ill give you a tip. If you upp a T-34, park it under cover, on a slope where its tipped a bit to the side, makes it very hard for an IL2 to punch thru the top armor. Thats why a tracked tank often cant be finished off.

Other tips are obvious. Dont drive in the conga line, bring flak with you, make sure ords are taken out....ect

Maybe lessen the distance needed to see GV icons. Down to 1,000 maybe. That wouldnt be a bad compromise and would make flak even more effective against attack planes. Make it easier for spawning GVs to tower out, "another suggestion". Even tho such things would go against an IL2 stick like myself. In the end they would energize the GV war which would also increase the IL2 action. So thats a good thing.

I see good things happening GV-wise for the future. No matter which side of the ball your on.