The CT Icon Issue

[Pongo]

Toad..dont get yur stuff in a knot...
I just flew in the CT for an hour.
Its more like a different settings furball then a historical arena. The LW needs to lose the G10 and A8 and pick up a G6 and A5..

I found the different icon range quite fun. Like funk says it forces you to look alot longer at an enemy from distance to get a feel for what he is up too. It gives each side lots of time to change what is happening on a merge and keeps both sides guessing alot longer.
I found I could merge alot more effectivly then I typically can in the MA.
As a furball I definatly rate it above the MA.

[popeye]

I like icons.  I guess virtual ACM is more fun for me than squinting at a monitor.

[daddog]

I really enjoy flying with "icons off" but many do not.

As a CM we have asked for more options for the icon settings, just to name a few:

off enemy 3k friendly
1k enemy 3k friendly
range counter only friend and foe
1k range counter only enemy 3k friendly

You get the idea.   Just not something they want to give us at this time. Personally I would use different settings for the TOD's and find one that most players like. I think range counter only would be great. For now we only have short and long.  
I hope that will change...  

[Tac]

Because the game is out to simulate WW2 aerial combat, not what you can see in real life.

Billboard icon takes away any and all suprise bounces and evasive manouvers. Just by seeing an icon you have instant SA with no effort on your part.

Fly in the MA with no enemy icons. Yes, you will be at a HUGE disadvantage and will die a lot, but once you get the hang of it, just closing into an enemy plane and blasting it to little iddy biddy pieces is most satisfying. you will also notice that the evasives other players do WILL throw you off rather quickly... because there are no icons to scream out to you that the con is below your nose and has suddenly changed vector and banked the other way (you see icons if you see only a small part of the enemy plane). Just as in real combat, planes engaged and disengaged to reacquire visual constantly... not possible with icons.

[Toad]

I've got no problem with those who think reduced/no icons are more fun.

That's an opinion, everyone's entitled to one and seems to have one. I have never cared how the "other guy" chooses to play.

You think it's more fun, good. Fun is what this is about. I'm totally in favor of having fun.

***

As for "realism", sorry. Those of you who want to make the case for "no/reduced icons are more realistic" are simply wrong.

From my point of view, there's absolutely no possible discussion. I've spent too much time looking at other aircraft in the air (as well as mock dogfighting in WW2 trainers) and too much time "flying" computer ACM games not to know the truth.

ALL computer ACM games provide severely reduced visual information when compared to RL. That's it. That's the truth. Period.

But, hey... go ahead and be wrong.  

***

Tac, this statement:

"Because the game is out to simulate WW2 aerial combat, not what you can see in real life."

speaks for all the "selective realists" on the board.

Seems so many only want THEIR version of realism.

If given this, then you would allow compromise on the "realism" of the P-38 modeling then right?  

***
As for the "elitism", I am near certain it will eventually rear its head and I feel it will be a detriment to the community. It won't kill it, it will just split it. That's no benefit, IMO.

***

Lastly, please remember that I've often said that the icon system should be subject to experimentation in order to improve it.

Cyas.

[LLv34_Camouflage]

Question for you all!  

From a gameplay point of view, which of these settings would you find better for the CT:

-Short enemy icons, long friendly icons. (Current setting)
-No enemy icons, short friendly icons. (Hopefully a setting that will be made available in the near future)

Camo

[Jekyll]

Originally posted by Toad:


ALL computer ACM games provide severely reduced visual information when compared to RL. That's it. That's the truth. Period.

Makes ya wonder how anyone ever got bounced in WW2, doesn't it  

[K West]

Jekyll. Strange to see you here these days. I found the same point Toads made to comment on.

"ALL computer ACM games provide severely reduced visual information when compared to RL. That's it. That's the truth. Period."

 I agree. The average graphics and monitor technology folks are using is simply not up to the task of replciating what we could see in RL. And won't be for some time.  That is why I always agree to long friendly, short enemy icons as it is the most changed (and challengin) from the 8k billboard like readouts we have in the MA.

 I've also always advocated having icons but sans the digital readout and one that has increased/decreased transparancy depending on rnage and how long you've looked at it. Much like what WWIIOl ended up using. What WWIIO has is nice although I'd dump the circular analog range inidcator as it's still a range counter.

 Westy

[popeye]

IMO, the range counter is much more useful as a rate of closure indicator, than rangefinder.  I think this is one function that must be included to compensate for our 2D "vision".  Doesn't have to be numbers, but there needs to be some form of rate of closure indicator.

(I also think that icons even the playing field between people using "minimal" systems on dialup connections, and those with Cadillac systems and very fast connects.)

[Jekyll]

Originally posted by O'Westy:
That is why I always agree to long friendly, short enemy icons as it is the most changed (and challengin) from the 8k billboard like readouts we have in the MA.

Sorry Westy, I must have misunderstood Toad.  I thought he was including AH when he spoke about 'all computer ACM games'.  IMO, ANY game which includes exact to the yard range and closure info provides far MORE detail than a real pilot had ... not only in WW2, but even in today's air combat environment.

 

I've also always advocated having icons but sans the digital readout and one that has increased/decreased transparancy depending on rnage and how long you've looked at it. Much like what WWIIOl ended up using. What WWIIO has is nice although I'd dump the circular analog range inidcator as it's still a range counter.

 Westy

Yup, no doubt about it that some kind of alpha fade-in is gonna be just about mandatory for flight sims in the future.  It's just SO different from the 'insta-billboard' type icon that's been so popular since AW back in 91 or so.  I'd say that ANYTHING which forces the fights closer to RL engagement ranges has got to be good for AH.  And you're right about losing the analog range circle.. its not really necessary at close engagement ranges.

See Westy, we CAN agree on some things  

Regards.. Jekyll

[Toad]

Well, of course you misunderstood me Jekyll.

While I try to write as clearly as possible, I do sometimes fail to do so...and at other times some people deliberately misunderstand for their own posting purposes, don't they?  

It seemed pretty clear to me that "visual information" in that post refers to the aircraft graphics and detail in ACM games, not the icons. Especially when one considers it in the context of the entire thread.

Then there's that line at the bottom as well... the one about experimenting to improve the icon system.

In fact, if you're real ambitious, I've posted several times about improving the icon system. Search it out; I'm sure there's some things even you would agree with.

If you have time, do that "shooting while jogging" riff you do. I always find that one entertaining.

Ta-ta for now.

 

[ 12-14-2001: Message edited by: Toad ]

[Jekyll]

Geez Toad.. you should really learn to chill out a bit more.