Aircraft Should Be Visible at Great Distances

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

Aircraft should be visible at great distances, weather permitting.

I say that if an aircraft is higher than the highest elevation in the terrain, it should be visible UP TO 5 kilometers up.

In World War II Online you constantly watch large aerial dogfights going on at high altitudes. The spectacle is so jaw-dropping, sometimes, that you get sniped while you're standing there, taking it all in.

Edited July 3, 2009 by Uziyahu--IDF

[raynor 0]

ArmA2 =/= WW2 Online.

Aircraft at 5KM up = dot.

Get over it.

[LJF 0]

I agree, choppers disappear after about 1-2km no matter what settings I use :(

[Farout 10]

ArmA2 =/= WW2 Online.

Aircraft at 5KM up = dot.

Get over it.

Are all the people in arma2 14 year old kids? My thread(the mouse fix) is full of tools like this kid...

"get over it" is the answer all these kids use in any forum post..lmfao...

Seems thats what most of the community is like over here, damn shame. Run by immature kids..

Edited July 3, 2009 by Farout

[raynor 0]

Why don't you go play something you don't think you will flop rather then wasting your valuable time on these forums. Unlike some people I don't need to bring in age to the equation to point out how blatantly retarded an idea is.

Are you tired of people telling you to get over it? Guess what...get over it.

Next time try to add something constructive to the content presented by the OP moron.

[beugnen 10]

i think the original poster has some merit.

living near an airport, i'm pretty sure i can see that plane coming in for approach at 10,000 ft or 3,000 ft for that matter.

considering that A2 is a realistic sim, adding the ability to see high-altitude aircraft would be most beneficial. if progressive meshes are used it would add little impact to the game's performance.:cool:

[max power 21]

Are all the people in arma2 14 year old kids? My thread(the mouse fix) is full of tools like this kid...

"get over it" is the answer all these kids use in any forum post..lmfao...

Seems thats what most of the community is like over here, damn shame. Run by immature kids..

Unfortunately, as far is the immature children in that thread go, you were one of them.

[raynor 0]

i think the original poster has some merit.

living near an airport, i'm pretty sure i can see that plane coming in for approach at 10,000 ft or 3,000 ft for that matter.

considering that A2 is a realistic sim, adding the ability to see high-altitude aircraft would be most beneficial. if progressive meshes are used it would add little impact to the game's performance.:cool:

Without good radar systems that can distinctly tell altitude and position it is a bit pointless to be looking up at a dot. Sure, you can shoot your stinger up there, but in the current ArmA 2 package there is no reliable way for a soldier on foot to be able to identify friend or foe. Of course if it was in the game that would be a different ( as the stinger does have IFF ), but it doesn't.

[LJF 0]

Without good radar systems that can distinctly tell altitude and position it is a bit pointless to be looking up at a dot. Sure, you can shoot your stinger up there, but in the current ArmA 2 package there is no reliable way for a soldier on foot to be able to identify friend or foe. Of course if it was in the game that would be a different ( as the stinger does have IFF ), but it doesn't.

But it doesn't have anything to do with friend or foe, it is rendering distance, and at the moment it is retarded. You need to be able to see them coming, in reality you'd see them from miles away, not from 1km.

And "get over it" is not constructive, it is only intended to inflame the situation. Perhaps you didn't mean it as such, but to me it appeared to be a rather barbed comment to make.

[raynor 0]

But it doesn't have anything to do with friend or foe, it is rendering distance, and at the moment it is retarded. You need to be able to see them coming, in reality you'd see them from miles away, not from 1km.

And "get over it" is not constructive, it is only intended to inflame the situation. Perhaps you didn't mean it as such, but to me it appeared to be a rather barbed comment to make.

Fixed wing? Maybe....

Rotary Wing? No, especially if they are flying Nap-Of-The-Earth. You can hear them well in advance, as you can in game.

In the game ( technically ) you can see out to 10KM, set your view distance to 10KM. I am sure there are very few people who can roll around with view distance at that setting with the other graphics at decent settings. So unless you have the ability to run the game at 10KM view distance constantly ( and have a server running at max 10KM when on multiplayer ) you won't ever get that option. Hence get over it.

I am not an expert on the game engine but from what I have seen it wouldn't be possible to expand ONLY the aerial part of the game to further distance horizontally, vertically maybe. But that is only educated guesswork.

WW2OL did and still does have substandard graphics compared to today's games. It is a great game ( I love playing it every now and then ) but it is able to work the way it does because it doesn't pull too many resources to render those objects at great distances. ArmA2 however has an already high object count and a decent load on most CPU's right off the bat.

[LJF 0]

ArmA 1 had much longer view distances, and I can run ArmA2 at 10km :D It doesn't matter what type of aircraft, the thing is, you should be able to see them ... quite well in fact ... but you can't. You can hear them and then all of a sudden "wham!" they're bearing down on with guns blazing, and they don't come over the tree line, that I could handle, it's just pop and they jump into being in the middle of the sky.

[IncipitOmega 10]

I agree,rendering distance must be longer !!!

[Placebo 29]

Perhaps we can discuss the topic without reverting to kindy mentality, novel approach I agree but let's try ;)

[dmarkwick 261]

I think having aircraft render at longer distances is appropriate. Viewdistance is always a balance between playable framerates and enemy killing ability at distance. When you have a vehicle that is not bound by the terrain features, like an aircraft, it becomes more important to see them further away. It's just too fast to be subject to the same viewdistance that a tank is.

Also, it's up in the air. That makes it naturally more visible.

[dunedain 48]

I'm totally agree with Uziyahu. I've mentioned this in another topic.

In an equity purpose, not everybody has the computer to push the game to 10km and some like me have serious performance issues with Arma2. Sky isn't a performance killer and there is lods ..

Note that even with max settings "10km, objects vhigh ect.." every object and unit is occulted after 2,2Km, no matter zoom magnification.

I don't know if it possible on this engine, only Bis can say, but i'm certain that lot of people would appreciate such feature in a simulator.

Edited July 3, 2009 by dunedain

[NoRailgunner 0]

Well if the pc can handle only 2000m viewdistance the player then will be able to see and engage air targets within 10.000m and vice versa? How would you make that happen if the planes and helicopters are flying fast and using different altitude? In MP without lags and stuttering??

[dmarkwick 261]

Well if the pc can handle only 2000m viewdistance the player then will be able to see and engage air targets within 10.000m and vice versa? How would you make that happen if the planes and helicopters are flying fast and using different altitude? In MP without lags and stuttering??

The viewdistances are calculated on individual machines, not by the server. So once the parameters are set, at mission start, the machine is responsible for working out what it can see and what it cannot.

Clutter already has a different viewdistance setting, so aircraft also having that ability is not a great leap :)

[beugnen 10]

Without good radar systems that can distinctly tell altitude and position it is a bit pointless to be looking up at a dot. Sure, you can shoot your stinger up there, but in the current ArmA 2 package there is no reliable way for a soldier on foot to be able to identify friend or foe. Of course if it was in the game that would be a different ( as the stinger does have IFF ), but it doesn't.

well perhaps the player is manning a AA gun or SAM. im not sure if these are in the game having just started. but if the feature goes in perhaps add these new guns too.

as for good radar systems, in 1960 the Ruskies were able to shoot down a U-2 spy plane at an apparent 80,000ft so i guess their system had no problems with 'dots'.:D

---------- Post added at 07:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:31 PM ----------

I'm totally agree with Uziyahu. I've mentioned this in another topic.

In an equity purpose, not everybody has the computer to push the game to 10km and some like me have serious performance issues with Arma2. Sky isn't a performance killer and there is lods ..

Note that even with max settings "10km, objects vhigh ect.." every object and unit is occulted after 2,2Km, no matter zoom magnification.

I don't know if it possible on this engine, only Bis can say, but i'm certain that lot of people would appreciate such feature in a simulator.

if the game utilised a progressive mesh system then ground buildings would automatically reduce to nothing over 3km but at the same time allow much greater view distance for airborne objects.

ground scenery, ground moving objects and airborne objects can be clipped individually.

[LJF 0]

I just don't know why they can't just increase the veiw distance of vehicles/aircraft/infantry etc, it wouldn't do that much to performance, there aren't that many of them. 3.5 - 4.0 km is reasonable I think - for the max of course.

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

ArmA2 =/= WW2 Online.

Aircraft at 5KM up = dot.

Get over it.

Sorry. I meant to say "up to", not "at least". Fixed, now.

---------- Post added at 07:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:26 AM ----------

Fixed wing? Maybe....

Rotary Wing? No, especially if they are flying Nap-Of-The-Earth. You can hear them well in advance, as you can in game.

Listen, I've been providing feedback to this franchise since before the first public demo of OFP:CWC. Please don't treat my threads like those of some pimply kid new to the franchise.

DO try to work on your reading comprehension skills before responding. I specifically mentioned altitudes higher than the highest terrain elevation. That isn't NOE.

As a soldier who served in an Air Cav squadron (somewhat acquainted with NOE flight) and participated in two rotations at the Joint Readiness Training Center, I can tell you that you can see both fixed and rotary-winged aircraft at considerable altitude. You can often recognize the aircraft at great distance and when they are fighting each other, you can often discern friend or foe by the ensuing "relationship".

Edited July 3, 2009 by Uziyahu--IDF

[kremator 1065]

I wonder how difficult this would be to code in ? Or can there be a mod that forces viewdistance of aircraft only to longer distances. As an A2 pilot I love to crank up my viewdistance for navigation but would love to know that I'm being seen by the enemy/friendly forces ! Airpower should be threatening and to SEE nevermind hear a jet heading towards your position SHOULD strike fear into the enemy!

[Alex72 1]

The draw distance is too low in ARMA2 as it is now. Its better in ArmA1 and im sure BIS sorts this out. At least i hope so. Many things dont work beacuse of this. Like scouting with UAV is impossible as you have to get within a tanks firing range before you see it etc.

But im sure it gets better. Lets see what 1.03 brings.

Alex

[Inkompetent 0]

Totally agree on this. There are few enough aircraft around in general so it shouldn't be more than a marginal hit on performance even with 'plenty' of them around (relatively speaking). It is quite hard to react to an incoming jet if you can't get a visual on it at about the same moment it starts shooting you. There's barely a reason for pop-up attacks since no one will see you unless you are so close you'd be at the maximum height of a pop-up attack anyway.

[kremator 1065]

Does anyone know how VBS2 handles this ?

[nkenny 1057]

I think this a very clever idea. Permitting aircraft (of all types) to be seen at longer distances shouldn't be too much of a performance drain (there never are many, and often a blob would do anyhow).

- No real performance cost (Tiny low poly object)

- Heightens the tension when spotting an aircraft. (ours or not)

+1

-K