been in ava alot lately

[bustr]

If you want to learn how to use a traditional gunsight reticle to judge distance go offline. Get behind a drone and see how it relates to the width of your reticle's circle or a horizontal line in the reticle. Most reticle circle's diameters equate roughly to a 39ft wingspan at 200 yards. So a radius is 400 yards. And so forth. Then turn off icons offline and start shooting drones.

The british M2 ring is 70mil wide with an upper and lower vertical line that stops at the ring. The horizontal line passes through the ring and has a space in the middle with a dot. The space in the center between the horizontal lines is about a 39ft wing span at 350-400 yards. The width of the horizontal space could be opened or closed to account for range based on a 39 ft wingspan.

The german revi ring is about 70mil. Three of the horizontal line ticks are about a 39ft wing span at aprox 350-400 yards. By the way I found out recently that hub mounted 109 cannon were set at 400 meters along with hood mounted MG. FW the 20mm in wing root and gondola were set to 550 meters. If you use a traditional Revi gunsight the multitiude of tick marks make lots of sense with those settings. Has to do with the slow rate of fire and high slow lobbed trajectory in the german cannons.

The american N9(P51B), L3(P38J,L) and N3-B(P38G,P39,P40) ring and dot is 70mil. The ring is a 39 ft wing at about 300-350 yards.

The american Mk8 has a 100mil ring and an inner 50mil ring, full cross with lower 45deg rays. The 100mil ring is about a 39ft wingspan at 333 yards. 50mil about 600yards.

The russian PBP1 has an 80mil ring with a 56mil inner ring and full cross. The inner cross has hash marks at about 5mil. Inner ring is a 39ft wing at about 350-400 yards.

The japanese Type98, Type3 are based on an F6F, P39, P40 wingspan at 300 yards.

See a pattern emerging.....many players do not realise that they don't track the other aircraft visualy. They track the icon and it's yardage counter because it's big bright and red. During close in dogfights they rely on the big red icon to save them from having to pay very close visual attention to the aircraft they are fighting until trigger time. This reliance on the red yardage counter for gunnery solutions is part of the reason some players have trouble with no-Icon mode.

[RufusLeaking]

Had a nice (very quick, in his favor) fight with Doomed this evening.  He had to leave.  Subsequently had several good, long fights with RufLeak, right out of the old AvA days, switching planes, switching sides, never knowing who was going to make the first mistake, enjoying it all even if it was you.  Good times, hope he stays with us.

- oldman

A great time, Oldman. 

The AvA is a lot of fun in its current form.  Doom does have a point about losing brown planes on the deck.  It might give people with bigger screens or better graphics cards an advantage.

On the other hand, it also strengthens the immersion.  Lose sight, lose the fight.  Oldman schooled me on that the other night.

[trap78]

From captian1ma about turning off in-flight dot dar:

we could do it in the AVA but it makes finding the fight harder, and no icons is hard enough at this point. we have tried it though.

I didn't know this had already been tried. Sorry I missed it. Making things harder is relative. To some, harder = more effort, more of a challenge and ultimately more fun. To others it's just something that gets in the way of pulling the trigger. Like no icons, some players prefer a neon sign over the bad guy saying "here he is". Some folks want a GPS map that shows them the exact location of every bad guy at all times and some don't. Flying with in-flight dot dar off is no different than flying with your base's radar porked, which we've all done routinely in the past.

posted by bustr:

...They track the icon and it's yardage counter because it's big bright and red. During close in dogfights they rely on the big red icon to save them from having to pay very close visual attention to the aircraft they are fighting until trigger time...

This is right on. 

[Puma44]

This is the problem for me.  Camouflage was meant to hide the plane while sitting on the ground, and the light underside to hide a high flying aircraft from ground observers.  It was never designed to, nor ever could, cause a moving plane to simply disappear while a pilot 1000 yards away is staring right at him.  But it happens to me regularly with the icons off.

Ahhh...not sure where you get your facts from, if they are facts, or opinion.  Camouflage is primarily intended/designed to make aircraft less visible in flight, i.e. blend in with the background that it is being observed against. Why? Because the pilot is in a combat situation and needs to be concealed in order to gain the advantage on his adversary, i.e. LOSE SIGHT, LOSE FIGHT.

In the early days, aircraft on the ground were hidden in hangars, stands of foliage, or covered with netting/foliage in an attempt to conceal them.


The camouflage on an aircraft doesn't often hide it very well on the ground because of being parked on a hard, flat surface be it paved or a field.  


Just zoom in?  Yes, that is fine because it at least approaches the size of what a RL pilot would see.  But then you have tunnel vision, which is not something a RL pilot would experience.

Not sure exactly what you are intending to say here.  Assuming "RL" means "real", the size a real life pilot sees an aircraft is purely dependent on the distance the aircraft is seen.  Tunnel vision?  Something a real pilot would not experience?  Sorry, but you are way off base here and not at all accurate .  By the way, are you a "RL" pilot?

As for the current high numbers . . . I hope I'm wrong, but I predict the novelty of no icons will eventually wear off, just like the novelty of missions wore off, and the novelty of the EWA wore off, and the novelty of the WWI arenas wore off . . . But best of luck to you.  For the players who enjoy the reality, immersion, challenge, and fun of no icons, I predict continued use of no icons.  

[Shifty]

This is the problem for me.  Camoflage was meant to hide the plane while sitting on the ground, and the light underside to hide a high flying aircraft from ground observers.  It was never designed to, nor ever could, cause a moving plane to simply disappear while a pilot 1000 yards away is staring right at him.  But it happens to me regularly with the icons off.

Just zoom in?  Yes, that is fine because it at least approaches the size of what a RL pilot would see.  But then you have tunnel vision, which is not something a RL pilot would experience.

As for the current high numbers . . . I hope I'm wrong, but I predict the novelty of no icons will eventually wear off, just like the novelty of missions wore off, and the novelty of the EWA wore off, and the novelty of the WWI arenas wore off . . . But best of luck to you.

I'm not a real pilot by any means and I'm not one of these elite computer pilots I keep reading about. During my 16 years in the USAF I was lucky enough to get a few rides in tactical aircraft. Twice I was lucky enough to be along for mock dogfights. Once in F-16B's and once in A-37s. You'd be surprised how hard it is to pick out another aircraft especially one lower than you moving against the the ground clutter. Camouflage is not intended to just conceal aircraft on the ground. The darker colors on top are to blend in with the ground when viewed from above just as the lighter colors on the bottom are an attempt to provide some concealment when viewed from below. Aircraft camouflage was never intended to make the aircraft invisible, but it was intended to make them harder to spot even for a second or two providing the pilot a chance to move to a favorable position or make an escape.

Like anybody else I can be standing in my back yard or driving in my car and see an aircraft flying straight and level a mile away and ID it. However I was shocked how hard it was to keep track and sight of the another aircraft while we were fighting. I'd lose sight of them very easily could only pick them up when the pilot would tell me where they were and what to look for. The second time in the A-37 I thought I'd do better but still struggled to see the other aircraft quickly. Both pilots explained to me it takes time experience training to acquire the skill. That's why they were fighter pilots and I was a crew chief. Now I'm not saying no enemy icons is more realistic, I am saying that the majority of people who spout off about how easily they can identify and spot aircraft from miles away are not doing it while twisting and turning in an aircraft themselves. This is my experience as a simple wrench bender, I do not claim to be a teh 3liTe pilet in real life or this sim.

<S>

[Oldman731]

However I was shocked how hard it was to keep track and sight of the another aircraft while we were fighting.

It's tough even when people aren't fighting.  The sky is a very big place, your airplane covers a lot of it up and everyone is moving along at speeds much faster than you're used to on the ground.  Anything smaller than an airliner or a blimp is hard to spot in the first place, and easy to lose sight of if you take your eyes off it for even a moment.

- oldman

[Seadog36]

I enjoy how it cancels out a little of the alt advantage the high alt pickers have with the icons off. Higher alt planes stick out a lot more against Rangers' awesome sky. I find I hear other planes sneaking up behind me first and hope I happen to break hard in the right direction. Oiling an opponent really helps spot them too, though if you are on the other end it's time to limp home fast, everyone swoops in for the cheap blind kill!

[Puma44]

I'm not a real pilot by any means and I'm not one of these elite computer pilots I keep reading about. During my 16 years in the USAF I was lucky enough to get a few rides in tactical aircraft. Twice I was lucky enough to be along for mock dogfights. Once in F-16B's and once in A-37s. You'd be surprised how hard it is to pick out another aircraft especially one lower than you moving against the the ground clutter. Camouflage is not intended to just conceal aircraft on the ground. The darker colors on top are to blend in with the ground when viewed from above just as the lighter colors on the bottom are an attempt to provide some concealment when viewed from below. Aircraft camouflage was never intended to make the aircraft invisible, but it was intended to make them harder to spot even for a second or two providing the pilot a chance to move to a favorable position or make an escape.

Like anybody else I can be standing in my back yard or driving in my car and see an aircraft flying straight and level a mile away and ID it. However I was shocked how hard it was to keep track and sight of the another aircraft while we were fighting. I'd lose sight of them very easily could only pick them up when the pilot would tell me where they were and what to look for. The second time in the A-37 I thought I'd do better but still struggled to see the other aircraft quickly. Both pilots explained to me it takes time experience training to acquire the skill. That's why they were fighter pilots and I was a crew chief. Now I'm not saying no enemy icons is more realistic, I am saying that the majority of people who spout off about how easily they can identify and spot aircraft from miles away are not doing it while twisting and turning in an aircraft themselves. This is my experience as a simple wrench bender, I do not claim to be a teh 3liTe pilet in real life or this sim.

<S>

for example:









....look familiar?



None of these camouflage patterns are designed to conceal the aircraft while parked.  Obviously, they are intended to hide while airborne.  Shifty, good writeup.  But, I do have to disagree with one thing.  No icons does make it more realistic.   

[sparow]

....look familiar?

Those SA "Puma" helicopters are from the Portuguese Air Force!!!! My air force!!!!  Where did you get that picture?

 

[Puma44]

Sparow, I Googled "aircraft camouflage and they came up on the search results page under the pictures tab, on this link:

  http://images.google.com/images?q=aircraft%20camouflage&biw=1902&bih=941

Those "Puma" helicopters blend in pretty well don't they?  Nice tight formation flying also.  A perfect example of hiding out while flying, the primary reason for camouflaging.  

[meou01]

So why do you associate with elitists? 

whats an elitist? i thought this was a game?

[captain1ma]

whats an elitist? i thought this was a game?

its a word people use when they get beat up by, or don't like a particular group of guys in the game. they make it seem like these individuals or group of people act like they are better then everyone else, in their mind. the truth of the matter is its just a game and some people are better at it then others. but if you say you're better at it, then you're an elitist. or if you say something on 200 to someone that they don't like you're an elitist, in some peoples eyes. just depends on who you piss of that day.  

and yes, contrary to popular believe, it is just a game. problem is people are good about making comments while hiding behind a keyboard.

[Shifty]

its a word people use when they get beat up by, or don't like a particular group of guys in the game. they make it seem like these individuals or group of people act like they are better then everyone else, in their mind. the truth of the matter is its just a game and some people are better at it then others. but if you say you're better at it, then you're an elitist. or if you say something on 200 to someone that they don't like you're an elitist, in some peoples eyes. just depends on who you piss of that day.  

and yes, contrary to popular believe, it is just a game. problem is people are good about making comments while hiding behind a keyboard.

What jaeger just said is.. He is tEh l33T

[TheBug]

I would have to concur.  I believe jaeger is one of the founding fathers of the 1337ists in the AvA

[captain1ma]

why thank you, thats the nicest thing you've ever said to me. now where are the sheep?