Tracers Poll

[ATAG_Colander]

Vote here.

[Archie]

What ARE tarcers? :)

[ATAG_Lolsav]

Like some others, i dont use tracers at all. I rather have the slot they take to fill them with bullets that can kill my enemy, not to make him a birthday cake. 5158

[9./JG52 Jamz Dackel]

Like some others, i dont use tracers at all. I rather have the slot they take to fill them with bullets that can kill my enemy, not to make him a birthday cake. 5158

lol, exactly I use night tracers in 2 guns only so make no difference to me..tbh I thought they looked Ok

[Catseye]

I couldn't vote in this poll as the option I would choose is not there.

To me it is not an either/or issue. ie., not an original versus new tracer question but rather making the new tracers just a wee bit brighter. But not to the extent of the old ones. Somewhere in the middle.

Just a little tweak is all.

[ATAG_Colander]

I couldn't vote in this poll as the option I would choose is not there.

To me it is not an either/or issue. ie., not an original versus new tracer question but rather making the new tracers just a wee bit brighter. But not to the extent of the old ones. Somewhere in the middle.

Just a little tweak is all.

Try again :)

[ATAG_NakedSquirrel]

I love the way the new tracers look. Is it a problem on lower resolutions that people can't see them? Because I see them just fine.

[Old_Canuck]

Yesterday I fired tracers from Eastchurch and couldn't see them land in Ramsgate. Just thought you should know that.

[235 Sqn. Coldstreamer (QJ-X)]

One I will say about the tracers.

the British have always used red phosphor in their tracer rounds, so all allied tracer rounds from ball /armour piecing ammo should be red and very bright. the only colour difference was white from de wilde/observer rounds.

Germany used a multitude of colours from white through to blue( blue tracer in a blue sky?) the main colour they used was yellow as chemical was they used was yellow phosphor or white phosphor under its real name.

The one big thing though they all gave a contrail on leaving the gun at altitude. at present only the 20mm cannons are giving smoke/contrails.

The last thing i will say about tracers.

at 600 MTS (approx) a tracer rounds ballistic arch makes it fly about 18 inches higher than standard ball ammunition and about 2 ft higher than armour-piercing. i wonder if this has ever been thought of ingame?

[Winston]

The choice I would vote for is not shown. Could you add: Keep the new tracers and add an option to use the old tracers.

[Winston]

I love the way the new tracers look. Is it a problem on lower resolutions that people can't see them? Because I see them just fine.
I think the problem is when viewed on higher resolutions. (makes them look smaller/finer)

[Winston]

Like some others, i dont use tracers at all. I rather have the slot they take to fill them with bullets that can kill my enemy, not to make him a birthday cake. 5158
I can assure you tracers are quite lethal. They're pretty much regular jacketed rounds, slightly lighter and a bit hollow in the base to allow for the phosphor. You wouldn't want to get hit with one! :thumbsup:

http://www.ammunitiontogo.com/images/whitetracerfinal.jpg

[ATAG_Lolsav]

No, but im not running around with armour plate either :D

[Kling]

I can assure you tracers are quite lethal. They're pretty much regular jacketed rounds, slightly lighter and a bit hollow in the base to allow for the phosphor. You wouldn't want to get hit with one! :thumbsup:

http://www.ammunitiontogo.com/images/whitetracerfinal.jpg

They look pretty thin to me..
Compared that to the old ones that you want to have back
http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/5884/thsz.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/543/thsz.jpg/)

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/1636/3xc6.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/4/3xc6.jpg/)

http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/6274/pe2w.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/30/pe2w.jpg/)

http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/9131/ofeu.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/850/ofeu.jpg/)

[Bear Pilot]

I think they look pretty damn big flying past my cockpit :shoot::snoopy:

[philip.ed]

I don't mind how they are now, but I think I preferred how they were before. It would be great to be able to decide in-game.

Also, please can we add smoke-trails to the British tracers? I've seen guncam footage from the BoB, and the smoke-trails are clearly visible.

[Winston]

They look pretty thin to me..
Compared that to the old ones that you want to have back
http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/5884/thsz.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/543/thsz.jpg/)

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/1636/3xc6.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/4/3xc6.jpg/)

http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/6274/pe2w.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/30/pe2w.jpg/)

http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/9131/ofeu.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/850/ofeu.jpg/)

Not talking about nighttime or exterior views and never complained about the look of the existing tracers when close to the airplane/gun muzzles. It's the tinyness of them out at 100-250 yards that I can no longer see at 1920x1200. See the full sized screenies below.

http://bhah.homeip.net:192/Winston/shot_1.jpg
http://bhah.homeip.net:192/Winston/shot_2.jpg

[Winston]

I don't mind how they are now, but I think I preferred how they were before. It would be great to be able to decide in-game.

Also, please can we add smoke-trails to the British tracers? I've seen guncam footage from the BoB, and the smoke-trails are clearly visible.
+1 But wasn't the 'smoke' caused by temperature differences and/or humidity?

[Winston]

I couldn't vote in this poll as the option I would choose is not there.

To me it is not an either/or issue. ie., not an original versus new tracer question but rather making the new tracers just a wee bit brighter. But not to the extent of the old ones. Somewhere in the middle.

Just a little tweak is all.
You know, I'm starting to get a little disgusted with myself for even voting on this. Is the thought process here to change and deviate from historical things in this sim simply because people want to? I thought Team Fusion was striving to keep this sim as historically accurate as they can and not change things on peoples whims. I hope people don't start voting on whether to strap 105mm guns under the Spits or putting ejector seats on Bf-109's just because that would be cool. Or changing the shape of the Spit wings because enough people said they don't have very good visibility looking down. I'm going to refrain from further comments on this subject and leave it up to the teams conscience to keep the tracers historically correct looking or give us the option to return to the more correct ones. Thanks for all the comments here on the subject and thanks to the team for continuing to support this game. :thumbsup:

[Uwe]

You know, I'm starting to get a little disgusted with myself for even voting on this. Is the thought process here to change and deviate from historical things in this sim simply because people want to? I thought Team Fusion was striving to keep this sim as historically accurate as they can and not change things on peoples whims. I hope people don't start voting on weather to strap 105mm guns under the Spits or putting ejector seats on Bf-109's just because that would be cool. Or changing the shape of the Spit wings because enough people said they don't have very good visibility looking down. I'm going to refrain from further comments on this subject and leave it up to the teams conscience to keep the tracers historically correct looking or give us the option to return to the more correct ones. Thanks for all the comments here on the subject and thanks to the team for continuing to support this game. :thumbsup:

5172

[BadBud]

I would vote to have the ability to choose the old tracers or the new. Sounds like the easiest solution for Winston as well as myself and others.
BadBud

[MadTommy]

Tracers look fine to me.. certainly big enough and very visible on my system,

GTX480 on native resolution 1680x1050 all setting maxed out.

I cant understand how some people are not seeing them. Is it possible to have some kind of system so people can adjust their visibility on their end. A bit like the zoom key [MOD] scale.

I certainly don't want my tracers any bigger. Cheers.

[Kling]

You know, I'm starting to get a little disgusted with myself for even voting on this. Is the thought process here to change and deviate from historical things in this sim simply because people want to? I thought Team Fusion was striving to keep this sim as historically accurate as they can and not change things on peoples whims. I hope people don't start voting on whether to strap 105mm guns under the Spits or putting ejector seats on Bf-109's just because that would be cool. Or changing the shape of the Spit wings because enough people said they don't have very good visibility looking down. I'm going to refrain from further comments on this subject and leave it up to the teams conscience to keep the tracers historically correct looking or give us the option to return to the more correct ones. Thanks for all the comments here on the subject and thanks to the team for continuing to support this game. :thumbsup:

Well its just that we dont have the same issue seeing the tracers and we apparently have different opinions on what is realistic and not.

Even your picture above showed very thin tracers.

[Kling]

Not talking about nighttime or exterior views and never complained about the look of the existing tracers when close to the airplane/gun muzzles. It's the tinyness of them out at 100-250 yards that I can no longer see at 1920x1200. See the full sized screenies below.

http://bhah.homeip.net:192/Winston/shot_1.jpg
http://bhah.homeip.net:192/Winston/shot_2.jpg

The problem will be to have them less bright and less laser looking up close but still brighter far away...

[skouras]

Yesterday I fired tracers from Eastchurch and couldn't see them land in Ramsgate. Just thought you should know that.

same

[Gromit]

having fired many tracers over the years I can add that the firer sees tracer as a dot, not a dash, if your seeing the effect from an angle then you will see the dash, but what you see on film is exaggerated by the slow film exposure making them look much longer than in real life, they are also a bit brighter than what we have now!

[Kling]

having fired many tracers over the years I can add that the firer sees tracer as a dot, not a dash, if your seeing the effect from an angle then you will see the dash, but what you see on film is exaggerated by the slow film exposure making them look much longer than in real life, they are also a bit brighter than what we have now!

So making them a tad brighter would make them more realistic? Just asking!

[Gromit]

They could be brighter but it's not a major issue really!

[Kling]

They could be brighter but it's not a major issue really!

No its a valid input. Maybe making them brighter is maybe a good middle way. Not sure if its possible since Im not a TF member. The majority, me included, seem to think the tracers should stay as they are now. The second biggest group wants them as they are but brighter...
The tracers are very bright, and fly at night or dusk or dawn and they will be even brighter...
I think the majority of us can all agree that they should not be wider...

[9./JG52 Jamz Dackel]

+1 But wasn't the 'smoke' caused by temperature differences and/or humidity?

Yes...Tracers don't emit smoke

[Gromit]

No its a valid input. Maybe making them brighter is maybe a good middle way. Not sure if its possible since Im not a TF member. The majority, me included, seem to think the tracers should stay as they are now. The second biggest group wants them as they are but brighter...
The tracers are very bright, and fly at night or dusk or dawn and they will be even brighter...
I think the majority of us can all agree that they should not be wider...

Totally agree on that, they tend to look like Star Wars effects!:stunned:

[Winston]

So making them a tad brighter would make them more realistic? Just asking!
More realistic would be slightly bigger and much brighter downrange at 100-200 yards. They are too tiny and dim at convergence ranges. I'm confident the Team will do the right thing here. There is credibility at stake to keep these patches historic and not deviate from the way they really looked just because people want something else.

http://bhah.homeip.net:192/Winston/shot_1.jpg
http://bhah.homeip.net:192/Winston/shot_2.jpg

Cheers

[EG14_Marcast]

I voted to make them brighter. In fact, this issue is only about german tracers, as the british ones are perfectly visible either from the shooter's than from the target's POW. But when I fly Blue, I can barely see the tracers of both cannons and MGs. And flyng Red once I noticed that I was under attack by a 109 only because I saw in front of me shrapnels of his explosive rounds, but when I realized what they were it was too late. If this difference is not historical, I think they should be made as bright as the british ones. The smoke trails of the 20 mm rounds are instead much better now than before.

[Winston]

Tracers look fine to me.. certainly big enough and very visible on my system,

GTX480 on native resolution 1680x1050 all setting maxed out.

I cant understand how some people are not seeing them. Is it possible to have some kind of system so people can adjust their visibility on their end. A bit like the zoom key [MOD] scale.

I certainly don't want my tracers any bigger. Cheers.
Dropping my 1920x1200 down to 1680x1050 does make them look bigger for me, but causes some GUI problems. It would seem people with lower monitor resolutions don't see them as so small? Kinda like running at lower resolutions to help see the plane dots at long ranges.

[Winston]

.......I think the majority of us can all agree that they should not be wider......
Again, is the Team more interested in keeping this sim historically accurate, or running a popularity contest to see what things are to be changed? I'm going to trust that they will do a little real research and weigh that more than the number of people that just want to change something.

Keep it real.

[92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)]

Again, is the Team more interested in keeping this sim historically accurate, or running a popularity contest to see what things are to be changed? I'm going to trust that they will do a little real research and weigh that more than the number of people that want to change something.

Keep it real.

Problem is, historical research requires using a normal human ~90 degree field of vision. The game replicates a 90 degree field of vision compressed in to around 30 to 50 degrees. Unless you want to sit with your face 1cm from the computer screen, or buy a screen that is 2m+ wide.

A tracer that is a single pixel wide on a 27inch screen, sitting 1 meter from your face represents 0.02 degrees of your field of vision. (68cm wide screen/ 1920 pixels = 0.0354 cm per pixel)

A tracer round which is 5 times the size of a normal round (that is, ~3.8cm (5 x 7.7mm) it's burning effect makes if 5 times bigger than the round) at 100m away occupies 0.0021 degrees of your field of view.

So, even at 1 pixel wide, the tracers are ALREADY 100 times larger than in real life!

By demanding increasing pixel sizes (which I know you're not doing, because you've argued previously for an on/off option), those of us with larger screens are being penalized with a less historical visual scenario.

I can see only two solutions;

1. As you've already suggestion, an option for players to turn the fatter tracer on or off
2. A brighter tracer, but not a wider tracer

I'm generally against option 2. At night the tracers are like lasers already. Any brighter would be a bit too extreme.

[ATAG_Colander]

Again, is the Team more interested in keeping this sim historically accurate, or running a popularity contest to see what things are to be changed? I'm going to trust that they will do a little real research and weigh that more than the number of people that want to change something.

Keep it real.

All I'm going to say is that by attacking the team all you'll manage is to not see a fix and/or a TF5.0.
It's bad enough to spend every minute of your free time working for you to add having to read posts like this.

[Winston]

All I'm going to say is that by attacking the team all you'll manage is to not see a fix and/or a TF5.0.
It's bad enough to spend every minute of your free time working for you to add having to read posts like this.
Not attacking anyone, just stating fact and opinion. I have every confidence the team will do the right thing.

Keep it real.

[ATAG_Lolsav]

fact and opinion.

Those two words in the same sentence do not mix :)

Now on a more seriously note: Winston you have to read more and write less. Seriously, you adopted a terrorist tactict at start, spamming evry thread with a problem you consider a flawn. It is your right to think that way, but you have to try to understand why others think diffrently. Did you read Philstyle post carefully? Considered evry aspects of what he is saying? Just 2 cents...

[kopperdrake]

In all fairness - you will never 'keep it real' as you are not working in a high dynamic range when it comes to lighting in the gaming world. What we all see on the monitors, and in this respect I feel it is definitely an issue, is just a white at the maximum the monitor can display it - nowhere near the brightness of a tracer. Any glows that would otherwise be caused by our own eyes' inadequacies to see anything too bright are replicated by programming skullduggery in the code. The same reason that we don't squint in -game when we stare in to the sun is the same reason we don't have tracer streaks burned into our retinas after laying down concentrated fire. The relative brightness of the tracers is, to some extent, subjective, as TF are trying to replicate a real world lighting issue within in a very narrow gamut of the light range that monitors can produce.

This is all fake, and the nearest we can get is a fake version that most people agree is as near to their memory, be it first hand or second hand from photographs. Those who have seen it for real are the best to comment - and even then, we would need to know details of the tracers they have witnessed so we can compare them with tracers from 1940, so ideally we would need visual recommendations from pilots who used tracers in 1940, to really 'keep it (as) real' as possible.

What I'm trying to say, really badly, is that the final result will always be subjective, and some will love it and some will hate it, and hopefully most will think it's okay enough to play with.

Of course, if an old pilot came in and said 'this is tosh - those tracers are awful compared to the real thing', then we'd be on to something :)

[MadTommy]

Not attacking anyone, just stating fact and opinion. I have every confidence the team will do the right thing.

Keep it real.

Maybe some more consideration to how you state your opinion to people who have given up massive amounts of free time should be made. Engage the grey matter more and the keyboard less would be another way to put it. :-P

Your tone does come across as rude to me.

[Kling]

I voted to make them brighter. In fact, this issue is only about german tracers, as the british ones are perfectly visible either from the shooter's than from the target's POW. But when I fly Blue, I can barely see the tracers of both cannons and MGs. And flyng Red once I noticed that I was under attack by a 109 only because I saw in front of me shrapnels of his explosive rounds, but when I realized what they were it was too late. If this difference is not historical, I think they should be made as bright as the british ones. The smoke trails of the 20 mm rounds are instead much better now than before.

Most german 20mm DONT have tracers! Espcially not the ones that explode at distance! Thats why you didnt seem passing you ;)

[Old_Canuck]

Maybe some more consideration to how you state your opinion to people who have given up massive amounts of free time should be made. Engage the grey matter more and the keyboard less would be another way to put it. :-P

Your tone does come across as rude to me.

+1 He's gone from "terrorist" to manipulative but why are we letting one individual wear down the volunteer team on this issue? If you want realism to the extreme please set yourself on fire next time your virtual plane catches fire. In the end, this is a game and we're all supposed to here for fun. Sorry to burst your bubble but it will never be real.

[ATAG_Lolsav]

(...) but why are we letting one individual wear down the volunteer team on this issue?

We are not. But even if i dont agree with him, he is entitle to express his opinion as long he is polite by doing so. Having a educated background to state his "opinion" would help too.

[ATAG_Headshot]

I personally like the new tracers but whichever way it goes I don't think it would be a good thing to have an on/off option on the client end as that could ultimately start accusations of people trying to game the game with one setting or so. Whichever way it goes I personally think all payers should have the same version and I have full confidence that the team that has already given us this amazing patch on their own time will pull through and keep it amazing. I'm blown away that this tiny issue has become this big.

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

Salute

Some people are under the mistaken impression the person who is the most persistent, the loudest and who monopolizes the conversation by sheer aggression and repetition is the winner...

I'm afraid I'm going to have to disappoint those living under this misapprehension, but in fact, most of us no longer subscribe to the rules of the pre-speech era of human development.

Thanks to everyone else for their patience (and polite) contributions to the discussion Buzzsaw :salute:

[Old_Canuck]

We are not. But even if i dont agree with him, he is entitle to express his opinion as long he is polite by doing so. Having a educated background to state his "opinion" would help too.

"Polite" is the key word here Lolsav. Have you read all his posts?

[ATAG_Lolsav]

Yes. So i purposedelly typed in "polite" on my observation there :D

[Davis0079]

all the pic linked here are for newer tracer rounds developed later then WWII...most have the tag "brighter" added on to them and were choosen as an upgrade because of that fact......the newer tracers used today are brighter....but to keep yelling that the dimmer ones ingame are unrealistic because you have see brighter tracers is not a valid reason for the team to remake something..... The tracer brightness and size in 4.0 look more realistic then the fireball spells we were casting in previous versions...


If I were to (and I'm not) ask about the realizim of the current tracers...I would question the burn times...not the fact that I cant see them at 2000yd at high noon.....



ps...linking vids of a mini gun shooting 3000rpm (about 300 per minute tracers) is not a good comparison to a tracer round developed in 1936.....I googled and looked up Ammunition and found that enough info for me to believe the new ingame look is better then the older laser tag tracers we had

[tumezz]

I find the smoketrail is actually an interesting point.

I know the trails from the tracers become visible at high altitude, however we might have a veeery subtle trail of smoke attached to the tracers as a compromise to keep them thin whilst increasing visibility, something comparable to the below:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hhiyl-SaeP8&feature=youtu.be
(watch in HD)

I used to looove my tracers in BoB2 (modded by someone), they were nice and visible but not obstructive at all.

The effect could be even attached to a specific ammo type only, to make it totally optional :idea:

[PFT_Endy]

Hmm, these look very pretty tbh.

[Mattias]

If you want realism to the extreme please set yourself on fire next time your virtual plane catches fire.

I'd love that roflmao

[Catseye]

I don't mind how they are now, but I think I preferred how they were before. It would be great to be able to decide in-game.

Also, please can we add smoke-trails to the British tracers? I've seen guncam footage from the BoB, and the smoke-trails are clearly visible.

Hi Philip,
It would be so with those designed with a weeping hole to enable the phosphor to ignite on leaving the barrel.

A very fine trail.

[Catseye]

Is the thought process here to change and deviate from historical things in this sim simply because people want to?

Hmmmmm,
Probably more accurate than your wonderful example of .303? tracer from an armored vehicle you submitted for evidence to your argument? Not to mention at night also.

So far, you have not made a valid argument to how tracers from .303 British ammunition looked during 1940 except for your personal perspective. Your opinion holds no more accuracy than anyone else's unless validated by actual evidence.

In fact, you probably are not even aware that the reference to "tracers" folks are making re: RAF, is in fact not a tracer but rather an incendiary round that has ignited on the way to the target leaving a trace. ergo, not a true tracer as such.

Perhaps you could shift from an argument of subjectivity to one of objectivity with evidence from 1940 that would uphold your argument - not evidence from other calibers, at night and from ground sources.

You have already been advised in another thread by TF that TF have noted your objection to the current tracer visuals and that continuing to fixate on this subject in the manner in which you do will not encourage any increased activity by TF to "bend" to your perspective but rather to continue to gather global information for adjustment from the user group and compare it to known historical sources.

This poll, is to further evaluate the perspective of the user group and then to compare that to historical evidence that TF has on file. And this historical evidence is extensive!

[Old_Canuck]

Well said. Here's a treat. Try to save it for the weekend. @Lolsav :salute:
5195

[Winston]

Problem is, historical research requires using a normal human ~90 degree field of vision. The game replicates a 90 degree field of vision compressed in to around 30 to 50 degrees. Unless you want to sit with your face 1cm from the computer screen, or buy a screen that is 2m+ wide.

A tracer that is a single pixel wide on a 27inch screen, sitting 1 meter from your face represents 0.02 degrees of your field of vision. (68cm wide screen/ 1920 pixels = 0.0354 cm per pixel)

A tracer round which is 5 times the size of a normal round (that is, ~3.8cm (5 x 7.7mm) it's burning effect makes if 5 times bigger than the round) at 100m away occupies 0.0021 degrees of your field of view.

So, even at 1 pixel wide, the tracers are ALREADY 100 times larger than in real life!

By demanding increasing pixel sizes (which I know you're not doing, because you've argued previously for an on/off option), those of us with larger screens are being penalized with a less historical visual scenario.

I can see only two solutions;

1. As you've already suggestion, an option for players to turn the fatter tracer on or off
2. A brighter tracer, but not a wider tracer

I'm generally against option 2. At night the tracers are like lasers already. Any brighter would be a bit too extreme.
Good info there Philstyle, but there are still intangibles in the mix, things that are incapable of being perceived by the senses. I now believe the big difference in what people see is related to their monitor resolution. In my case at 16:10 aspect a Samsung 26" at 1920x1200 and a Samsung 30" at 2560x1600, the tracers are barely visible at convergence distance, but I just helped a friend patch his game up to v4.00, his monitor has a 1366x768 resolution and guess what? The tracers looked fine downrange. So who else is using the ultra high resolutions? Have any of the beta-testers used 16:10 ultra high resolutions? Could be just a matter of them looking tiny at these extreme specs. Maybe the team can investigate this? Or test on similar 16:10's at similar resolutions? I'll bet what you see will be very enlightening.

I do so love this, my favorite simulator, and the efforts the Team Fusion Team have put into it to make it better. If I weren't so passionate about this sim I could probably care less about how the tracers look. But I do love it so and so I'll apologize for coming across as harsh. No disrespect meant to anyone here.

And I have fired old 1940's .30 cal ammo belts with red tracers (not British) from an old water cooled WWI .30 cal MG while training Marines in the late '60's early '70's and also as a private contractor in West Africa in the early '70's. We also ate old C-rations made in the 1940's. Mmmmmm good, but the cigarettes inside were stale!

[Winston]

Hmmmmm,
Probably more accurate than your wonderful example of .303? tracer from an armored vehicle you submitted for evidence to your argument? Not to mention at night also.

So far, you have not made a valid argument to how tracers from .303 British ammunition looked during 1940 except for your personal perspective. Your opinion holds no more accuracy than anyone else's unless validated by actual evidence.

In fact, you probably are not even aware that the reference to "tracers" folks are making re: RAF, is in fact not a tracer but rather an incendiary round that has ignited on the way to the target leaving a trace. ergo, not a true tracer as such.

Perhaps you could shift from an argument of subjectivity to one of objectivity with evidence from 1940 that would uphold your argument - not evidence from other calibers, at night and from ground sources.

You have already been advised in another thread by TF that TF have noted your objection to the current tracer visuals and that continuing to fixate on this subject in the manner in which you do will not encourage any increased activity by TF to "bend" to your perspective but rather to continue to gather global information for adjustment from the user group and compare it to known historical sources.

This poll, is to further evaluate the perspective of the user group and then to compare that to historical evidence that TF has on file. And this historical evidence is extensive!
Pic wasn't meant to be entered as "evidence", just to rib the guy who implied that tracers do no harm. :D

[donut.boy2]

Pic wasn't meant to be entered as "evidence", just to rib the guy who implied that tracers do no harm. :D

i feel like tracers fired during the day are less visible than represented currently in the patch,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2hwWpSMmro

everyone understands you are pushing for the changes you want with the tracers, can you provide photo or video representing what you expect from the tracers that coincides with the daytime conditions you use as examples of visibility issues in the game?

btw, vid of .303 at night http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIHaD7O47QI

[jjohnson241]

Hmmmmm,
Probably more accurate than your wonderful example of .303? tracer from an armored vehicle you submitted for evidence to your argument? Not to mention at night also.

So far, you have not made a valid argument to how tracers from .303 British ammunition looked during 1940 except for your personal perspective. Your opinion holds no more accuracy than anyone else's unless validated by actual evidence.

In fact, you probably are not even aware that the reference to "tracers" folks are making re: RAF, is in fact not a tracer but rather an incendiary round that has ignited on the way to the target leaving a trace. ergo, not a true tracer as such.

Perhaps you could shift from an argument of subjectivity to one of objectivity with evidence from 1940 that would uphold your argument - not evidence from other calibers, at night and from ground sources.

You have already been advised in another thread by TF that TF have noted your objection to the current tracer visuals and that continuing to fixate on this subject in the manner in which you do will not encourage any increased activity by TF to "bend" to your perspective but rather to continue to gather global information for adjustment from the user group and compare it to known historical sources.

This poll, is to further evaluate the perspective of the user group and then to compare that to historical evidence that TF has on file. And this historical evidence is extensive!

A suggestion: TF (I assume) based the "tracer tone-down" on available historical evidence as the post above indicates. Perhaps someone from TF could share that evidence for the benefit of we peons. May go a long way toward silencing this debate.
I too have considerable experience in initiating and observing .50 cal and 7.62MM tracer fire, day time and night time, while serving with the USMC in Vietnam. My impression of the tracers in TF V4 is that they could be a tad brighter and visable for a longer distance. That's offered in total ignorance of the brightness and distance visability of the tracers used by the RAF "in the day".
I'm not suggesting TF got it wrong or was arbitary in making the TF4.0 adjustment. Just share the data or at least the basis by which the adjustment was made. :S

[Winston]

..... can you provide photo or video representing what you expect from the tracers that coincides with the daytime conditions you use as examples of visibility issues in the game?
If I had a pic of what my monitors displayed of the old tracers in v3.01 I'd gladly post it but since I have upgraded to v.4.00 I cannot. I never expected to have this problem, so I never kept any 3.01 screenies at 1920x1200 or 2560x1600 but now I understand so much more about it and it seems to be caused, for me, by the ultra high resolutions of my monitors. I'm sure the Team will gather all the info they can and weigh it all carefully and hopefully testing in the future at these resolutions. I trust they will make the right decision in this matter.

I'll experiment with rolling back to v3.01 by restoring the old .dll file and see if I can get some screenies of 'then' and 'now'.

I have no other info or input left to post since seeing the tracers at 1366x786 today and realizing it's a resolution issue. I'm sure many here will revel in that. Ha, ha :D

Cheers all

[Mattias]

A suggestion: TF (I assume) based the "tracer tone-down" on available historical evidence as the post above indicates. Perhaps someone from TF could share that evidence for the benefit of we peons. May go a long way toward silencing this debate.
I too have considerable experience in initiating and observing .50 cal and 7.62MM tracer fire, day time and night time, while serving with the USMC in Vietnam. My impression of the tracers in TF V4 is that they could be a tad brighter and visable for a longer distance. That's offered in total ignorance of the brightness and distance visability of the tracers used by the RAF "in the day".
I'm not suggesting TF got it wrong or was arbitary in making the TF4.0 adjustment. Just share the data or at least the basis by which the adjustment was made. :S

:salute:

I think Philstyle (QJ-P) summed it up quite good in his post: http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6465&p=68806&viewfull=1#post68806

We did not just make this change for the heck of it, but as I said 1000 posts ago we are investigating the possibility to make the new tracers optional :thumbsup:

[kopperdrake]

If I had a pic of what my monitors displayed of the old tracers in v3.01 I'd gladly post it but since I have upgraded to v.4.00 I cannot. I never expected to have this problem, so I never kept any 3.01 screenies at 1920x1200 or 2560x1600 but now I understand so much more about it and it seems to be caused, for me, by the ultra high resolutions of my monitors. I'm sure the Team will gather all the info they can and weigh it all carefully and hopefully testing in the future at these resolutions. I trust they will make the right decision in this matter.

I'll experiment with rolling back to v3.01 by restoring the old .dll file and see if I can get some screenies of 'then' and 'now'.

I have no other info or input left to post since seeing the tracers at 1366x786 today and realizing it's a resolution issue. I'm sure many here will revel in that. Ha, ha :D

Cheers all

I have the original install (pre TF patch). If the tracers in that are the same as the TF3 patch then I can grab a screen shot and upload it. I also run at the 2560 horizontal res so can grab that as well. I'll try and do it tomorrow morning if it's raining (if it's dry I'm out hedge cutting until the evening).

[Mattias]

I have the original install (pre TF patch). If the tracers in that are the same as the TF3 patch then I can grab a screen shot and upload it. I also run at the 2560 horizontal res so can grab that as well. I'll try and do it tomorrow morning if it's raining (if it's dry I'm out hedge cutting until the evening).

:salute:

No need to -all possible opinions on the tracers has been vented and we're looking into the option of having the new ones optional for the very vocal minority who don't like the new ones.

No offence to anyone intended -but please realize that any further discussions on this topic won't lead to anything other than what's stated above. and in several posts before it :thumbsup:

[No.401_Wolverine]

Just please note that it's not a 'minority'.

According to the poll as it sits right now, equal numbers of people want to keep them as they are in the TF 4 patch as want to change them (either back to the old ones or to increase their brightness).

[Mattias]

Just please note that it's not a 'minority'.

According to the poll as it sits right now, equal numbers of people want to keep them as they are in the TF 4 patch as want to change them (either back to the old ones or to increase their brightness).

:salute:

Reverting to the old ones or keeping the new ones but with increased brightness are two different animals.

91 votes for keep them or keep them but increase brightness and 12 votes for a re-increased width. These 12 are a minority and they have been very vocal :D

But we try to listen to all opinions and we will... nah I don't have the energy to write the same thing for the one hundred time :thumbsup:

[No.401_Wolverine]

If that's how you're choosing to interpret the poll results, then yes. I wasn't sure how you were claiming minority. Now I am. Thank you.

[Mattias]

If that's how you're choosing to interpret the poll results, then yes. I wasn't sure how you were claiming minority. Now I am. Thank you.

:salute:

12 votes for the old size is a minority regardless of how you count :D

All this time arguing about this can be better spent at us making this optional and you flying the sim, right? :thumbsup:

[Winston]

I have the original install (pre TF patch). If the tracers in that are the same as the TF3 patch then I can grab a screen shot and upload it. I also run at the 2560 horizontal res so can grab that as well. I'll try and do it tomorrow morning if it's raining (if it's dry I'm out hedge cutting until the evening).
Thank you. Just for my own curiosity I'd very much like to see other screenies from people at these super high resolutions. Again here's the best one I have full sized and made while holding down the trigger for some time. There's 1 white tracer in each of my gunbelts spaced every 5 to 6 rounds.

Thanks again to the Team for investigating the possibility of addressing the tracers in a future patch.

http://bhah.homeip.net:192/Winston/shot_2.jpg


.....All this time arguing about this can be better spent at us making this optional and you flying the sim, right? :thumbsup:
For all your listening to us here and the effort you make investigating and possibly offering us the option to return to the original is greatly appreciated.

[Kling]

Thank you. Just for my own curiosity I'd very much like to see other screenies from people at these super high resolutions. Again here's the best one I have full sized and made while holding down the trigger for some time. There's 1 white tracer in each of my gunbelts spaced every 5 to 6 rounds.

Thanks again to the Team for investigating the possibility of addressing the tracers in a future patch.

http://bhah.homeip.net:192/Winston/shot_2.jpg


For all your listening to us here and the effort you make investigating and possibly offering us the option to return to the original is greatly appreciated.

Now, on that picture Winston, you tracer is very very bright and clear! Surely you dont want them any bigger than that??

[J2_Sturm]

Got to agree with Kling on this one, Winston - they look pretty visible to me in your screenshot.

[No.401_Wolverine]

:salute:

12 votes for the old size is a minority regardless of how you count :D

All this time arguing about this can be better spent at us making this optional and you flying the sim, right? :thumbsup:

LOL. Okay, you don't get what I'm saying. But it doesn't matter. Your second point is certainly correct. S!

[Winston]

Now, on that picture Winston, you tracer is very very bright and clear! Surely you dont want them any bigger than that??
Why yes, yes I do. They are bright and clear in that pic aren't they. But too small in diameter compared to the original ones. Are you looking at the elongated laser type image on the right near the gun muzzle (never had a problem with that) or the tiny dots downrange at 250 yards?

[92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)]

If I had a pic of what my monitors displayed of the old tracers in v3.01 I'd gladly post it but since I have upgraded to v.4.00 I cannot. I never expected to have this problem, so I never kept any 3.01 screenies at 1920x1200 or 2560x1600 but now I understand so much more about it and it seems to be caused, for me, by the ultra high resolutions of my monitors. I'm sure the Team will gather all the info they can and weigh it all carefully and hopefully testing in the future at these resolutions.
l

Hi Winston, thanks for identifying your resolution.
Very high resolution will result in perceptively narrower tracers.

I run on 1920x1080 with a 24 inch monitor. For me, the tracers are quite visible. However, if I were to increase that resolution, I'm sure they would start becoming quite difficult to see.
The alternative to lowering your resolution, is to go for a giant screen.. if you've got the cash.

As with all things computer-game, replicating "real life" sound and visual inputs on a flat piece of plastic and through a couple of small speakers is not easy. It'#s made even harder when you're still trying to understand the game's code!

Anyways, good luck.

[Winston]

Philstyle,

Thanks for your understanding of the resolution issues and for your insight into the programming. No doubt that the super high res's are working against the new smaller tracers effect. For now I've gone to reducing my resolution to 1680x1050 and suffering through the GUI problems that I get from not running at my higher native resolution. I now see the tracers flying past my cockpit that I couldn't see before (and that happens a lot!). Nevertheless, having fun with v4.00 and still discovering new things. We had our 1st official Squadron session tonight and everyone commented on the great new view zoom feature and the fantastic new winter textures look like there's really snow on the ground!

[VO101_Tom]

Philstyle,

Thanks for your understanding of the resolution issues and for your insight into the programming. No doubt that the super high res's are working against the new smaller tracers effect. For now I've gone to reducing my resolution to 1680x1050 and suffering through the GUI problems that I get from not running at my higher native resolution. I now see the tracers flying past my cockpit that I couldn't see before (and that happens a lot!). Nevertheless, having fun with v4.00 and still discovering new things. We had our 1st official Squadron session tonight and everyone commented on the great new view zoom feature and the fantastic new winter textures look like there's really snow on the ground!

Winston,
I will not read through the whole debate across lots of topics, I don't know this was mentioned before or not, but we faced a problem, that our squad mates don't see contact, meantime other guys see clearly. This maybe caused the same reason, why you don't see tracers: the wrong monitor settings. Not the videocard, but the monitor! The new monitors have many built-in picture-refining options, like "sport", "movie", "natural". This and the features like dynamic contrast is good for movies, but bad for games. These settings can ruin the picture, wash the small details into the background.

We have no general solution, which can work in every PC with every monitor, all we can do, using a sample picture. If you see the dots, your monitor is fine. If you don't, then the problem is your monitor or your eyes.

Here is the two picture:
TEST picture (http://www.pumaszallas.hu/Private/Tom/forum_kepek/monitorteszt.bmp) (uncompressed .bmp, you have to use it without zoom. The picture is 1680x1050 pixel)

And here is the help, where you should search the black dots:
TEST HELP (http://www.pumaszallas.hu/Private/Tom/forum_kepek/monitorteszt_help.bmp)

This pictures was taken with previous version, but that is irrelevant now. The point is, that you see the dots or don't.

[Winston]

VO101_Tom

Thanks for your continued interest in this. I think pretty much everything has been covered on this subject by now and a lot of understanding has resulted from the discussion. I'm thinking that the original CLoD programmers factored in the use of the ultra high resolutions when 'tuning' the tracer size thus making them look too big for the low or normal resolution users. Your 're-tuning' of them didn't affect most users at normal resolutions, but the ultra high res users can have problems in seeing them at distance.

When viewing your pictures full sized, I can just barely see some of the dots at 1680x1050 but I do not see them at 1920x1200 and 2560x1600 unless I zoom in my photo viewer. Clearly a resolution issue and nothing more as I have come to realize after seeing the new tracers in person on other peoples systems/monitors. I've already tried my Samsung 24" and 30" monitors different settings (game, movie, etc.) and found none of them improved the 'dots' of the tracers out at 250 yards. I have created a custom profile that helps somewhat and 'dialing down' my resolution to 1680x1050 helps even more. The best I can get is on the 30" at 1680x1050, way down from the native res of 2560x1600.

Now having come this far it's time to get in the sim more and just fly v.400. Thanks to all who have participated in this discussion and helped to confirm the ultra high resolution issue. Still hoping the Team can find a way to return the original tracers as an option if that's possible, thus putting an end to compatability once and for all, but if you can't I'll figure a way to deal with it. Maybe buy a lower res monitor and put the 30" Big Boy back in the closet! :D

[ATAG_Lolsav]

@Winston

I read your post and i was actually satisfied to see you understood the problem resumes it self to a hardware problem (monitors). Plus i enjoyed the fact you understood the friendly debate type of thing we enjoy having in here. The arguments for each side dont have to be "your my enemy" type of thing, or to resemble just as a "fanboy" of Team Fusion. What we all pursue, TF included i believe, is to achieve the most realistic simulation with the tools that were given (almost none).

Thank your for your understanding and, i believe, the support to the "cause" of "keeping the dream alive" :thumbsup:

[Winston]

ATAG_Lolsav,

I sincerely support The Teams efforts to continuously improve this game. All week long I've been making my rounds visiting local friends and upgrading their v3.01 game up to the new v4.00.

Since you don't accept physical gratuity, I'd like to buy you all a cyber drink. My favorite ale. Cheers!

http://bartasbrewtour.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/audacious-apricot-ale-pyramid.png

[ATAG_Colander]

I think this thread and it's poll have received all the useful input it will receive so I'm closing it.
Personally, I was expecting more than 140 votes. It seems that there is not much interest or our numbers are shrinking fast.