Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

[Video] Unrealistic gunnery in RoF - NEW VID!


  • Please log in to reply
225 replies to this topic

#1 hq_Reflected

hq_Reflected
  • Posts: 4711

Posted 20 June 2010 - 11:37

Hi all,

I finally managed to make a video of this unrealistic gunnery "bug". Please note that I've got flamed from lot bigger distances before.

All this happened at 12,000 feet against a supposedly "unstable" Dr1 and I wasn't even flying straight. (this thread is not against dr1s, it's against gunnery in general)

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=TYbTve5lXSI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">

PS: bloody nice fight, Winger! 8-) Did I damage you in the process?

Here's another one:

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=Nq8KS65eCBc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">
  • 0

#2 J2_squid

J2_squid
  • Posts: 3815

Posted 20 June 2010 - 11:44

Yep,

Couple of things, Turbulence makes a difference, and I also think that the MGs are too accurate.
Couple that with my wish for stoppages to be modeled and you can wave good bye to shooting like that.
  • 0

#3 Ogami_musashi

Ogami_musashi
  • Posts: 859

Posted 20 June 2010 - 12:02

Hi all,

I finally managed to make a video of this unrealistic gunnery "bug". Please note that I've got flamed from lot bigger distances before.

All this happened at 12,000 feet against a supposedly "unstable" Dr1 and I wasn't even flying straight. (this thread is not against dr1s, it's against gunnery in general)

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=TYbTve5lXSI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">

PS: bloody nice fight, Winger! 8-) Did I damage you in the process?

What was the cause of that necessity to get close?
  • 0

#4 Rammi

Rammi
  • Posts: 78

Posted 20 June 2010 - 12:03

He He reflected. Winger told me in TS that he just wanted to turn home when you started burning :mrgreen:
  • 0

#5 hq_Reflected

hq_Reflected
  • Posts: 4711

Posted 20 June 2010 - 12:17

He He reflected. Winger told me in TS that he just wanted to turn home when you started burning :mrgreen:

Bad luck for me I guess! :lol:
  • 0

#6 winger2

winger2
  • Posts: 1056

Posted 20 June 2010 - 12:21

Hi all,

I finally managed to make a video of this unrealistic gunnery "bug". Please note that I've got flamed from lot bigger distances before.

All this happened at 12,000 feet against a supposedly "unstable" Dr1 and I wasn't even flying straight. (this thread is not against dr1s, it's against gunnery in general)

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=TYbTve5lXSI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">

PS: bloody nice fight, Winger! 8-) Did I damage you in the process?

Reflected, its WAS really difficult to keep the DR stable in that height. You know i have loads of practice in this plane and often enough i loose control of the DR in that height. This time i had a good day regarding stability. With gunnery I also have a lot of practice.
The point in getting on the 6 of someone within 10m is that 2 shots might be enough to do the job instead of like 100 that i needed to damage you enough. The fight in 12.000 ft heigh i constantly turned back towards the lines because i was extremey far above enemy area. You kept attacking and with every attack you left some of your height advantage. There always was a VERY small window in wich I could bring off some shots. They just were lucky shots combined with a lot of practice.
Those weapons sure have been very inaccurate and they ARE in game. That doesnt mean that they lost all their destructive anergy just because they travelled 500 meters.
I dont think there is something wrong with the wepons. I mean this is a game and we can just go on and "waste" some shots because they only thing that can happen to us when there is no ammo left is that we will be virtually shot down in the worst case.
In real life the pilots had to be MUCH more cautious about when to shoot.
There is nothing wrong with the accuracy and damage the guns do imho.
Btw. It was a nice fight and you were doing very well - what was the reason for me to try and get back home all the time, but you didnt let me. Only chance for a DR in such a situation is to fight back.
I think oyu just got too cocky:)

Winger

PS: Yes you damged me.

EDIT: did some formal corrections and there was a wrong YOU where i meant I:)
EDIT 2: Regarding getting close to ones six. I do most of my kills while diving from above getting REALLY close to my opponent before I start shooting. It DOES extremely help getting close because the shots do a lot more damage that close.
  • 0

#7 hq_Reflected

hq_Reflected
  • Posts: 4711

Posted 20 June 2010 - 12:33

EDIT: did some formal corrections and there was a wrong YOU where i meant I:)
EDIT 2: Regarding getting close to ones six. I do most of my kills while diving from above getting REALLY close to my opponent before I start shooting. It DOES extremely help getting close because the shots do a lot more damage that close.

I know you usually do that! You got me like that sveral times! :lol:

True about ammo waste. perhaps real pilots were more afraid of gunjams than to spam 100s of rounds from a great distance?
  • 0

#8 WW1EAF_Ming

WW1EAF_Ming
  • Posts: 2565

Posted 20 June 2010 - 12:37

That doesnt mean that they lost all their destructive anergy just because they travelled 500 meters.

More height means less atmosphere means less momentum/energy lost means more damage all else being equal yes

There's at least a square in there and maybe even a cubic (or greater) relationship involved I think in transfer of energy

A car hits a pedestrian at 20mph, few bruises
30mph, broken leg
40mph, pedestrian is mangled

Because as the small difference in speed increases, the damage does not go up in a linear way. The rule might be 'double the speed means four times the damage'

The atmosphere, twice-as-thin might mean four-times-the-damage, that's what I'm getting at :) for any given distance

I remember reading one of the Richthofen's reports and he's thinking 'He's too far away to hit me…' and getting hit immediately after

Ming
  • 0

#9 Miggins

Miggins
  • Posts: 3115

Posted 20 June 2010 - 12:41

I don't think it shows unrealistic gunnery. The spread of bullets is rather large, it's not like his bullets are all on target, and it only needs a single bullet in thr right bit of the engine to make it flame, in the right place of the pilot for an insta-kill and the right place on the wings to damage a strut or a spar.

The effective aimed range (braced on ground) was around 2000m I think, and the munitions were still "potent" at up to 4000m. The Spandau MG08 was even capable of being used in an indirect-fire mode on the ground.

Now we have them fixed onto a moving platform that buffets about in use, and they are firing at a moving target also, so a drop in aimed accuracy like this video shows seems believable to me.

The actual munitions should travel a significantly further distance at this altitude before becoming ineffective, but the incidence of long range hits should be possible.

I will reiterate my thoughts from a different thread, if these long range shots happened in reality, we would have very little documentary evidence of it due to them being successful in removing the input from 50% of the pilots involved, and the pilots who performed the long range shots might even be unaware that they had succeded.
  • 0

#10 winger2

winger2
  • Posts: 1056

Posted 20 June 2010 - 12:45

EDIT: did some formal corrections and there was a wrong YOU where i meant I:)
EDIT 2: Regarding getting close to ones six. I do most of my kills while diving from above getting REALLY close to my opponent before I start shooting. It DOES extremely help getting close because the shots do a lot more damage that close.

I know you usually do that! You got me like that sveral times! :lol:

True about ammo waste. perhaps real pilots were more afraid of gunjams than to spam 100s of rounds from a great distance?

Ayem gunjams may have been a reason too. At least a combination from diffrent reasons.
BTW. Its actually easier to hit when the target flys in an angle away from me because 1. the distance doesnt increase as fast and 2. the area to aim at is much bigger.
  • 0

#11 Miggins

Miggins
  • Posts: 3115

Posted 20 June 2010 - 12:48

@Winger - Did you record the track for this? The whole "long range sniper shot" debate hangs upon the pilots who perform it using the zoom facility to artificially gain an advantage over their extending opponents. I'd be interested to see the play of events from your cockpit if you have it.
  • 0

#12 winger2

winger2
  • Posts: 1056

Posted 20 June 2010 - 12:49

I don't think it shows unrealistic gunnery. The spread of bullets is rather large, it's not like his bullets are all on target, and it only needs a single bullet in thr right bit of the engine to make it flame, in the right place of the pilot for an insta-kill and the right place on the wings to damage a strut or a spar.

The effective aimed range (braced on ground) was around 2000m I think, and the munitions were still "potent" at up to 4000m. The Spandau MG08 was even capable of being used in an indirect-fire mode on the ground.

Now we have them fixed onto a moving platform that buffets about in use, and they are firing at a moving target also, so a drop in aimed accuracy like this video shows seems believable to me.

The actual munitions should travel a significantly further distance at this altitude before becoming ineffective, but the incidence of long range hits should be possible.

I will reiterate my thoughts from a different thread, if these long range shots happened in reality, we would have very little documentary evidence of it due to them being successful in removing the input from 50% of the pilots involved, and the pilots who performed the long range shots might even be unaware that they had succeded.

–edit–

@Winger - Did you record the track for this? The whole "long range sniper shot" debate hangs upon the pilots who perform it using the zoom facility to arfificially gain an advantage over their extending opponents. I'd be interested to see the play of events from your cockpit if you have it.

Nope sorry, i didnt record it.
In fact the last flamer we see on this video i was not aware that i flamed him. It was literally the last bullet that flamed him. The message showed me that i shot him down.
The shots were not done zoomed in excessively. Compared to a normal gaming rig i am already at "normal" zoom level when fighting because i run 3 monitors. I only zoom in when scanning the area for planes. Sometimes, not in this case, i use a buttion i placed a gunsight on to.
People just loose the sense of how "zoomed out" they are flying using one monitor. I became aware of that when swithing to multi monitors. Distances are much more realistic when i dont have to up my FOV eytremely and therefor in fact zoom out much furthher than it would be "normal".
  • 0

#13 WW1EAF_Ming

WW1EAF_Ming
  • Posts: 2565

Posted 20 June 2010 - 12:53

pilots who perform it using the zoom facility to artificially gain an advantage over their extending opponents

Can't exactly call that cheating Miggs but it's perhaps 'gaming the game' and I would never use that feature

Ming
  • 0

#14 winger2

winger2
  • Posts: 1056

Posted 20 June 2010 - 12:59

pilots who perform it using the zoom facility to artificially gain an advantage over their extending opponents

Can't exactly call that cheating Miggs but it's perhaps 'gaming the game' and I would never use that feature

Ming

Using this feature is not an unfair advantage simply because EVERYONE is free to use it.
Zooming is necessary with the current state of the game.
Also if you say zooming in would be a unfair advantage then zooming out would also be.
In reality people could simply see much further than we can in the game. Must be because of the clipping distances (duno if thats the right word) we have currently.
I personally wouldnt have a problem if the zoom would be locked to a "normal" value but i am sure EVERY single monitor user would become upset of how small the window he sees suddenly is.
  • 0

#15 WW1EAF_Ming

WW1EAF_Ming
  • Posts: 2565

Posted 20 June 2010 - 13:05

Using this feature is not an unfair advantage simply because EVERYONE is free to use it.
Zooming is necessary with the current state of the game.
Also if you say zooming in would be a unfair advantage then zooming out would also be.


100% agree with that mate.

I said I don't use it, not that you mustn't. Fill yer boots, enjoy yourself :)

Ming
  • 0

#16 winger2

winger2
  • Posts: 1056

Posted 20 June 2010 - 13:10

Fill yer boots, enjoy yourself :)
Ming

What does that mean? :?: :D :lol:

Winger
  • 0

#17 Miggins

Miggins
  • Posts: 3115

Posted 20 June 2010 - 13:23

I don't think there is a problem with the gunnery in RoF, there are quite a few who percieve that pilots are commonly using the zoom to get an edge when firing at extending planes though.

I only have RoF on a single 22" monitor, so the zoom is invaluable for EA spotting, though even the fact that I have been deliberately trying to reproduce the use of zoom and long range shooting over the past several weeks, and even setting 500m convergence to help matters, I have succeded in wounding a single pilot (and that was Necaramone last night on SYN), but the distance was way closer than 500m as well.

My contention is that extending pilots need to add the very tiniest of control surface movement to make the long range shots almost unnatainable.

@winger - I think Ming is expressing some envy at a 3 monitor flying setup you mentioned.
  • 0

#18 Miggins

Miggins
  • Posts: 3115

Posted 20 June 2010 - 13:26

pilots who perform it using the zoom facility to artificially gain an advantage over their extending opponents

Can't exactly call that cheating Miggs but it's perhaps 'gaming the game' and I would never use that feature

Ming

I don't call it cheating either Ming, after exhaustive testing here in both SP and MP I simply call it impossible to use the zoom to RELIABLY improve your accuracy at long range.
  • 0

#19 winger2

winger2
  • Posts: 1056

Posted 20 June 2010 - 13:34

@winger - I think Ming is expressing some envy at a 3 monitor flying setup you mentioned.


Thanks :) No intention to cause envy here.

Winger
  • 0

#20 =IRFC=AirBiscuit

=IRFC=AirBiscuit
  • Posts: 2455
  • LocationNaples, FL USA

Posted 20 June 2010 - 13:50

The best (read: most realistic and effective) solution to cure the long range sniping BS (and it is BS – all you folks with snap views and 50' FOV) is to add constant small oscillations to the pilots head position. In real life, you could never hold your head perfectly still right behind your gun's sights. Between exerting force on the control stick to line up your shot, sitting through g-forces and bumps in your aircraft, prop wash and wind gusts beating against your face.. you would be swaying behind your guns like a drunken sailor. The game should reproduce this effect.

The best solution would be to refactor / tune the "shake in cockpit" effects, and then make it a server-designated realism setting like most other helpers. That way people who like to snipe other players at 500m can stick to the newb servers, and people who enjoy a little realism and immersion can play on the big boys servers.
  • 0

=IRFC=Air Biscuit

http://quetoo.org


#21 catchov

catchov
  • Posts: 3986

Posted 20 June 2010 - 13:53

you would be swaying behind your guns like a drunken sailor. The game should reproduce this effect.

I do and it does :lol:
  • 0

#22 =IRFC=AirBiscuit

=IRFC=AirBiscuit
  • Posts: 2455
  • LocationNaples, FL USA

Posted 20 June 2010 - 13:55

I appreciate your self-deprecating humor (I do), but in all seriousness, no the game doesn't reproduce this and it's hurting gameplay – especially multiplayer.
  • 0

=IRFC=Air Biscuit

http://quetoo.org


#23 catchov

catchov
  • Posts: 3986

Posted 20 June 2010 - 14:04

I thought it was accurate how you phrased it :) I use trackir (no F10 saved view, no snap views or any other tricks) and simply try to line up the sites manually by moving my head like the real pilots did.

And, as you explained, stick forces, g forces, bumps etc in real life would make this difficult. And so it does for me in RoF.

It may have been a flippant remark to you, and it was, but also very truthful to me ;)
  • 0

#24 hq_Jorri

hq_Jorri
  • Posts: 14143

Posted 20 June 2010 - 14:17

I don't think the current situation is all that unrealistic, and I don't mind the skill of being an accurate gunner, which comes with practice, is a bad gameplay element. Winger is able to pull off these shots because he plays the game a lot and has the skill to do it, but even from his mouth we can hear it is not easy and largely dependant on luck.

So it's great to hear the other side of this: the gunner's side.
  • 0

#25 Miggins

Miggins
  • Posts: 3115

Posted 20 June 2010 - 14:26

There is no way to RELIABLY use the zoom to hit at range, and this is as it stands now where it is possible to set a "locked" gunsight view, though the locked sight-view is a lot less "zoomed" than is possible to get using the pilot head zoom ability.

The player head zoom you cannot "lock" for stability anyway, so your view using this method means you have to move about to line up the sights.

–edit–
After trying again WITHOUT TIR running you can artificially set your default view to be down the gunsight, and the the pilot head zoom can give you this greater "zoomed in" view at your target looking down a "locked" gunsight view, but then you don't have TIR available for every other situation, and you are flying around with the vast majority of your screen being cockpit interior and gunsight.


Have you tried it at all Jay, or is this merely your percieved impression about how it works?

All you need to do to avoid the long range shots is to have the tiniest control surface movements as you extend, and a tiny piece of luck to avoid the cloud of bullets in your vicinity. The guy shooting at you is relying on luck, pure and simple, to get hits on your plane from anything over 200m.

Stop perpetuating the myth that long range sniping is "easy" and needs "solving".
  • 0

#26 unknwn

unknwn
  • Posts: 119

Posted 20 June 2010 - 14:41

The best (read: most realistic and effective) solution to cure the long range sniping BS (and it is BS – all you folks with snap views and 50' FOV) is to add constant small oscillations to the pilots head position. In real life, you could never hold your head perfectly still right behind your gun's sights. Between exerting force on the control stick to line up your shot, sitting through g-forces and bumps in your aircraft, prop wash and wind gusts beating against your face.. you would be swaying behind your guns like a drunken sailor. The game should reproduce this effect.

The best solution would be to refactor / tune the "shake in cockpit" effects, and then make it a server-designated realism setting like most other helpers. That way people who like to snipe other players at 500m can stick to the newb servers, and people who enjoy a little realism and immersion can play on the big boys servers.
Interesting idea. :)
I thought it was accurate how you phrased it :) I use trackir (no F10 saved view, no snap views or any other tricks) and simply try to line up the sites manually by moving my head like the real pilots did.

And, as you explained, stick forces, g forces, bumps etc in real life would make this difficult. And so it does for me in RoF.

It may have been a flippant remark to you, and it was, but also very truthful to me ;)
I don't see any bumps, g forces,stick forces which would make harder to align the sights. If you don't move your head or have deadzones set up while using trackir sights will be lined up.
Currently with shake in cockpit turned on there is only a static vibration which doesn't make harder to aim.
  • 0

#27 Miggins

Miggins
  • Posts: 3115

Posted 20 June 2010 - 14:59

A couple of guys have "Buttkicker" running here don't they?

Does the use of TIR in combination with Buttkicker make things harder when "free" aiming?
  • 0

#28 MiG-77

MiG-77
  • Posts: 2651

Posted 20 June 2010 - 15:10

All you need to do to avoid the long range shots is to have the tiniest control surface movements as you extend, and a tiny piece of luck to avoid the cloud of bullets in your vicinity. The guy shooting at you is relying on luck, pure and simple, to get hits on your plane from anything over 200m.

Stop perpetuating the myth that long range sniping is "easy" and needs "solving".

Totally agree. I have never been "sniped" (shotdown) when extending that way. Some cases there have been lucky bullet that have wounded my pilot, but thats it.
  • 0

#29 HotTom

HotTom
  • Posts: 8177

Posted 20 June 2010 - 16:23

Well, Mig, for the record, I have been sniped from far distances extending away from a Dr1 in my SE5a.

Okay, time to annoy the DF, turn-and-burn-at-100-feet-crowd (again):

I know this is a lost cause when folks think "the game" is more important than "the simulation" (last time I brought it up I thought Jorri was gonna have a stroke :lol: ) but:

GET RID OF THE ZOOM

and

GET RID OF LOCKED VIEWS

Whether it's "cheating," which is what I call it, or as Ming says "gaming the game": To use zoom as an aid in aiming is absolutely bogus.

"Zoom vision" is something no real pilot ever has had.

Does it help in aiming? Yes!

Not if you zoom it all the way out but at about 2.5x to 4x, which is what real sniper rifles use (contrary to what you see in the movies), it sure helps me when I try it.

I find it quite effective as an aiming aid and I know others do as well.

"Pro-Zoomers" insist it is absolutely essential to spot distant enemies.

At the same time they froth at the mouth and hop up and down squealing "Balance! Balance!" when the sides in one of their totally unrealistic dogfight arenas are uneven.

Well, guess what? Using zoom view gives you both an aiming and a spotting advantage the guy who isn't using it doesn't have.

It creates "unbalance."

Give everyone 1x magnification and nothing more and the playing field is level.

Everyone will be able to spot other aircraft at the same range (as unrealistic as that range is).

Everyone will shoot using the same magnification.

What could be more "balanced"?

Same thing with locked views.

Yes, I can improve my gunnery considerably by locking my sight view.

Why?

Because in real life you have to line up three things: Front Sight, Rear Sight and target. And that ain't easy in a bouncing airplane.

If you lock a view, the front sight and rear sight already are fixed in one view so you only have to line up two things: locked sight and target. Much, much easier.

Whether you call it a "cheat" or "gaming the game" it's bogus and fake and the game should be designed to prevent locked views, not make it easier to set up.

Zoom vision and locked sight view didn't happen in real life.

There is nothing realistic or historically accurate about either of them.


So why have them in RoF?

HT
  • 0

#30 winger2

winger2
  • Posts: 1056

Posted 20 June 2010 - 18:03

Well, Mig, for the record, I have been sniped from far distances extending away from a Dr1 in my SE5a.

Okay, time to annoy the DF, turn-and-burn-at-100-feet-crowd (again):

I know this is a lost cause when folks think "the game" is more important than "the simulation" (last time I brought it up I thought Jorri was gonna have a stroke :lol: ) but:

GET RID OF THE ZOOM

and

GET RID OF LOCKED VIEWS

Whether it's "cheating," which is what I call it, or as Ming says "gaming the game" to use zoom as an aid in aiming is absolutely bogus.

"Zoom vision" is something no real pilot ever has had.

Does it help in aiming? Yes!

Not if you zoom it all the way out but at about 2.5x to 4x, which is what real sniper rifles use (contrary to what you see in the movies), it sure helps me when I try it.

I find it quite effective as an aiming aid and I know others do as well.

"Pro-Zoomers" insist it is absolutely essential to spot distant enemies.

At the same time they froth at the mouth and hop up and down squealing "Balance! Balance!" when the sides in one of their totally unrealistic dogfight arenas are uneven.

Well, guess what? Using zoom view gives you both an aiming and a spotting advantage the guy who isn't using it doesn't have.

It creates "unbalance."

Give everyone 1x magnification and nothing more and the playing field is level.

Everyone will be able to spot other aircraft at the same range (as unrealistic as that range is).

Everyone will shoot using the same magnification.

What could be more "balanced"?

Same thing with locked views.

Yes, I can improve my gunnery considerably by locking my sight view.

Why?

Because in real life you have to line up three things: Front Sight, Rear Sight and target. And that ain't easy in a bouncing airplane.

If you lock a view, the front sight and rear sight already are fixed in one view so you only have to line up two things: locked sight and target. Much, much easier.

Whether you call it a "cheat" or "gaming the game" it's bogus and fake and the game should be designed to prevent locked views, not make it easier to set up.

Zoom vision and locked sight view didn't happen in real life.

There is nothing realistic or historically accurate about either of them.


So why have them in RoF?

HT

I wouldnt have a problem if this would be removed. But IF you remove it you have to increase the distance at wich an airplane would become visible because it would be like flying in a wood without being able to see the trees.
Also IF you lock the zoom like you said you would have to do so at 1x zoom not 0,5 nor 2x nor whatever factor. One thing i can tell you will happen, and i would bet on that, is EVERYONE using a single monitor setup starting to scream "i cant play like that cause the part of the environment thats visible to me, looking thru my 24" "window" is too small and i cant see anything".
As a help spotting distant enemies i think the zoom is a proper replacement for increased clipping distance wich is impossible to realize with the current power the average gamingmachine provides. Some dev said they could increase the distance but it would render the game unplayable for the most people/common gamingPCs.
What I think is that the zooming is a compromise the developers made and i also think its not the worst compromise they could make.

winger
  • 0

#31 hq_Reflected

hq_Reflected
  • Posts: 4711

Posted 20 June 2010 - 18:13

I agree Winger. While zoom certainly helps this kind of sniping it's not the main cause. I for one can't shoot accurately while zoomed in completely. It makes me seasick it's so wobbly. The tunnel vision it gives makes aiming challenging, though in a different way than zoomed out.

Locked views are a lot more of a cheat IMO, that's why I don't use them at all.
  • 0

#32 HotTom

HotTom
  • Posts: 8177

Posted 20 June 2010 - 18:18

I wouldnt have a problem if this would be removed. But IF you remove it you have to increase the distance at wich an airplane would become visible because it would be like flying in a wood without being able to see the trees.
Also IF you lock the zoom like you said you would have to do so at 1x zoom not 0,5 nor 2x nor whatever factor. One thing i can tell you will happen, and i would bet on that, is EVERYONE using a single monitor setup starting to scream "i cant play like that cause the part of the environment thats visible to me, looking thru my 24" "window" is too small and i cant see anything".
As a help spotting distant enemies i think the zoom is a proper replacement for increased clipping distance wich is impossible to realize with the current power the average gamingmachine provides. Some dev said they could increase the distance but it would render the game unplayable for the most people/common gamingPCs.
What I think is that the zooming is a compromise the developers made and i also think its not the worst compromise they could make.

winger

I understand zoom is a compromise.

No, I am not happy with a render distance of 2.5 km.

But I am less happy with a render distance that depends on how far out you are zoomed.

With full zoom you can spot aircraft and trains and airfields and all sorts of objects at impossibly long ranges. How is that more realistic?

So, if the render distance is 2.5 km at 1x magnification for everybody, while you can argue with the realism of the render distance it is the same render distance for everyone.

Just like in real life.

And using a moderate amount of zoom as an aiming aid also is highly effective but totally unrealistic.

It's a compromise we don't need and it causes more harm to the realism of the sim than the 2.5 km render distance.

Winger, you're such a damn good shot you don't need the crutch but others do and they use it :P

Greg, you don't explain what the advantage of zoom is or how it is in any way realistic. Can you send me a picture of Mannock or McCudden using a telescope while flying their SE5as? :lol:

Their magnification was 1x. Period.

S!

HT
  • 0

#33 hq_Jorri

hq_Jorri
  • Posts: 14143

Posted 20 June 2010 - 18:38

With full zoom you can spot aircraft and trains and airfields and all sorts of objects at impossibly long ranges. How is that more realistic?

That range is 9km, which is not that impossible since they will still be very hard to make out: basically, at 9km you can't see much other than an aircraft contrasted against the blue sky.

So, if the render distance is 2.5 km at 1x magnification for everybody, while you can argue with the realism of the render distance it is the same render distance for everyone.

Just like in real life.

Wrong. When I'm standing next to a friend of mine who is looking in the same direction, and I'm looking at the street in front of me because there is a Ferrari there, I will not be able to see what time it is on the churchclock in the distance, even though it is within my vision.

My friend however, who is looking at the church clock, can read the time and knows that he just missed the beginning of Dr Who on television: but he also missed that beautiful Ferrari.

This is exactly the system in ROF at the moment: when I'm zoomed out I will know what is generally going on around me, but I will not be aware of objects in the far distance. When I focus on objects in the far distance, however, I will no longer be able to see what is going on around me.

I think that's more realistic than everyone just being able to see everything.

Perhaps they should change the snapviews to still have headbobbing, that might be a good solution: and it means nothing would have to be changed in normal cockpit view.
  • 0

#34 HotTom

HotTom
  • Posts: 8177

Posted 20 June 2010 - 18:52

Well, J, we just ain't gonna agree on this topic :lol:

You have a friend with zoom vision? Does he wear a cape? Faster than a speeding bullet? More powerful than a locomotive? Leaps tall buildings at a single bound? 8-)

1x for everyone seems as "balanced" as you can get.

That doesn't mean everyone will check six when they should (especially target fixated folks like me – and you when there's a sports car around :shock: ) but they won't be seeing anything different than anyone else if they do look around if everyone is at 1x.

What zoom does is give you a magnified view (with a more narrow field of vision and compressed depth of field – distant objects are larger in relation to closer objects, just like a telephoto lens on a camera).

It's so bogus :roll:

Even today, real pilots flying with NVGs (Night Vision Goggles) are only using 1x magnification. There's a reason for that: depth perception.

When you can show me photo of a WWI pilot flying with a telescope strapped on his helmet, I'll agree with you :lol:

S!

HT
  • 0

#35 Parazaine

Parazaine
  • Posts: 1902

Posted 20 June 2010 - 19:12

pilots who perform it using the zoom facility to artificially gain an advantage over their extending opponents

Can't exactly call that cheating Miggs but it's perhaps 'gaming the game' and I would never use that feature

Ming

If we had a realistic view distance (un-zoomed) then perhaps this wouldn't be an issue.

I have been playing some really good realistic missions lately in multiplayer where realism and immersion are only ruined by the completely unrealistic viewing distance (even zoomed in).

Intercepting recons. would be greatly helped if they were visible at realistic distances. In large maps, even knowing their approximate location, it is often very difficult to find them.

I have always believed, the 'zoom-fix' to be the worst feature of the game. There have been a few discussions of the 'problem' and possible solutions put forward by more capable people than myself.

Of course if everyone is going to play 'airquake' style missions then it becomes less important but for those of us playing full-real coop. style missions it is a real immersion killer to see planes, balloons etc magically appearing and disappearing when they come within the default viewing distance.

Remove this zoom feature and make the viewing distance longer and you will go a long way towards fixing these 'sniper shots'.
  • 0

#36 Sirocco

Sirocco
  • Posts: 1966

Posted 20 June 2010 - 19:24

There's a difference between "zoom" and "attention". I was looking at a test video I recorded earlier, and I didn't comment on spotting a Nieuport 28 immediately, not because I wasn't zoomed in but because my attention was elsewhere on the screen.
  • 0

#37 hq_Neca

hq_Neca
  • Posts: 282

Posted 20 June 2010 - 20:08

Yesterday and today, I was shot from some unreal distances, and unreal situations, I've got a video of a dogfight with J2 Parazine who got me from some nose up position shooting only 1-2 bullets. I know that you could always say it's due to zoom or so, but this must be fixed, it's just not WWI situation we try to simulate, don't we? Boom and Zoom planes just can't take advantage they usually had back then.. I know you aimming experts would say you don't have low temperatures and so on, but I'm saying that back then, this was IMPOSSIBLE.

Winger, you said by yourself MvR said some great things about Dr1, and he also said you can't fire from more than 100 meters distance, and you're doing that, so don't use things from him that you like, and ignore those that you don't like.
  • 0

#38 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15542

Posted 20 June 2010 - 20:26

We all know that long range gunnery is too easy in RoF. Argument over. Let's hope 777 does something about it.
  • 0

#39 Miggins

Miggins
  • Posts: 3115

Posted 20 June 2010 - 20:46

OK HT, you want realism?

Next time you get "killed" in-game, please delete your copy of RoF, your dead in the sim world, that way you will only ever see one more extreme range sniper shot (unless the death is caused by a crash on landing or a "proper" close-in kill by an opponent on your tail, but you are still dead, no?). Tou continue to insist that you want no more than the historic pilot might have had, well he only had one life, you can respawn when desired.

Did you not read ANY of my posts in this thread and the other related "sniper" threads?

Yeah, Zoom can aid AIMING, it does jack-sh#t for ACCURACY.

Getting your sights onto the target is merely the start of the process.

I can keep planes in my sights at massive distances, but my bullets will get nowhere near them by anything other than sheer luck, especially when zoomed in, because my plane moves, the target moves, and the "aim" becomes irrelevant due to having to lead yhe target.
  • 0

#40 Miggins

Miggins
  • Posts: 3115

Posted 20 June 2010 - 20:58

When you can show me photo of a WWI pilot flying with a telescope strapped on his helmet, I'll agree with you :lol:

When you show me a pilot who can get killed and be back in the air fighting in under 5 minutes your nonsensical posts about realism or the lack thereof will have some weight.
  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users