Optics for Naval Artillary -1 reply

Please wait...

DeepBattleTheory

Ich bin ein Computerspieler!

50 XP

7th April 2004

0 Uploads

137 Posts

0 Threads

#21 16 years ago
FrederfContradictory: "I'm guessing you have a very small idea of how complex real ship gunsights are..." "And I didn't say nobody on these boards knows how guns were aimed..." False: "The only person who doesn't know how they were aimed is you, Frederf." Rudeness: "Thank you, now can YOU please buzz off?" Contradictory: "Frederf, what he was getting at is that there were no sights on a naval gun." "That is exactly what I was getting at." "If it's only crosshairs that you want, then I think that's okay." First off my frustration comes from the arrogance of matyast in the post that suggested we go without. I specifically stated I was for sights, not optics (although, it 's very possible he was using optics and sights interchangably. A lot of people say the Tiger in FH has optics when it doesn't, it's just a fancy crosshair) and you have such an issue my suggestion and then agree with someone who says the same thing >.<

Jesus okay dude you win. Sometimes people get confused on the net man... I'm sorry okay, I didn't know who was saying what. BTW posting stuff like you did with "contradictory"/"false"/whatever just shows you're being anal and taking things way too seriously. Seriously, do you actually take what's said on forums seriously? "Rudeness" lol, it's all how you interpret text my friend. If you're so thin skinned, I suggest you go outside and talk to nice people instead assholes like me on the net. :moon:




Frederf

I take what n0e says way too seriously

50 XP

2nd March 2004

0 Uploads

2,156 Posts

0 Threads

#22 16 years ago

Yeah, I get the way-too-seriously stuff a lot. I don't like making sense and losing a discussion. Thanks for your reply, makes me happy. I know you have good intentions and wish to educate. Anyway, most of us agree that some kind of aimy thingy for the ships, yes?




Beast of War

Born to kill

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

2,698 Posts

0 Threads

#23 16 years ago
FrederfYeah, I get the way-too-seriously stuff a lot. I don't like making sense and losing a discussion. Thanks for your reply, makes me happy. I know you have good intentions and wish to educate. Anyway, most of us agree that some kind of aimy thingy for the ships, yes?

Yes.....it makes no sense it is missing.




DeepBattleTheory

Ich bin ein Computerspieler!

50 XP

7th April 2004

0 Uploads

137 Posts

0 Threads

#24 16 years ago
FrederfYeah, I get the way-too-seriously stuff a lot. I don't like making sense and losing a discussion. Thanks for your reply, makes me happy. I know you have good intentions and wish to educate. Anyway, most of us agree that some kind of aimy thingy for the ships, yes?

Yes, I agree on putting a crosshair.




Arisaka

Staff suffers from PCD

50 XP

16th August 2004

0 Uploads

1,495 Posts

0 Threads

#25 16 years ago

Well, how about simplifying the fire command unit - by having an officer position on the bridge with optics. When turned they would show the direction to point the guns in degrees, accurate to say - 0.3 degrees. Elevation of the guns can also be read as number of horisontal lines above a given 0deg line. The high position of the officer accompanied by say 2x optics should make this possible.

In addition the turrets themselves could have narrow 1x optic sights with crosshairs for extra fine tuning (if neccesery) and of course, a way to read the current setting.

Even on public servers this would probably work better than the current artillery approach (ok - there are people who have the neccesery skills with that approach too).




Skipster

I live on Gaming Forums

50 XP

29th July 2004

0 Uploads

1,068 Posts

0 Threads

#26 16 years ago

That would work well, except for the fog. Arty spotting is the only way I can see to give ships the ability to accurately place rounds at distances greater than the gunner can see/shoot.




Spike1

Slightly cooler than a n00b

50 XP

19th July 2004

0 Uploads

40 Posts

0 Threads

#27 16 years ago

Just a crosshair would be fine for me. Small crosshair in normal view (view from the bridge of the ship). Huge crosshair in gunsight view (inside turret) - thin but stretching all the way to the edges of the viewport. Would help a lot if the lines had little notches on them. It's not worth doing tank-type optics IMO. As for the lower guns hitting the deck, I say that the person operating the ship should know how to use it. Ships should always fire broadside (over the side) at targets at close range, not over the bow or stern. Also historically firing big guns directly ahead or astern caused blast damage to the ship - so it's actually quite realistic the way it is. I don't want the minimum elevation of the guns increased to avoid the deck because that will affect broadside firing too, and make it near impossible to hit small, low targets like submarines and torpedo boats.




Arisaka

Staff suffers from PCD

50 XP

16th August 2004

0 Uploads

1,495 Posts

0 Threads

#28 16 years ago
SkipsterThat would work well, except for the fog. Arty spotting is the only way I can see to give ships the ability to accurately place rounds at distances greater than the gunner can see/shoot.

I don't really like the way the call for arty works, with a sudden magical spot up in the air and so on. And I really don't like that yellow/red/colored cross-thing floating in mid-air in front of me - if I can get something more like the real thing! (iron sights, optics, etc).

And this way the ship would also be more independent. Might include both though, and make all happy. I know which method I would chose whenever possible!

Maybe reduce the fog and increase the view distance a lot on large maps - would make for extremely intense sea battles - with long ranges (gotta love long range!)

I have a few map requests and other ideas in the works, I just want to release some of them in a batch :)




Frederf

I take what n0e says way too seriously

50 XP

2nd March 2004

0 Uploads

2,156 Posts

0 Threads

#29 16 years ago

I would agree with the double F9 sight picture, but the normal view shouldn't have the yellow cross. It forces people to use the good one and doesn't allow snapshots and reduces visual clutter while driving. I'll photoshop up a suggested and tell me what you think.