u/X3Melange

The reason is because the zoom is necessary to more closely capture human visual acuity.

A major issue in video games is that they do poor justice to human vision. No computer screen that exists on the market today comes anywhere even remotely close to modeling human vision in any graphics engine. Human visual acuity is significantly higher than even gaming on the best 4k display. But that being said, the monitors most people are using are going to be even worse. Human vision is superior in terms of the scale of objects, contrast sensitivity, etc.

Many in sim communities balk at any kind of mechanism in a game that they perceive irrationally to be unrealistic because they automatically view it as artificial. What everyone in these discussion forgets is that the game environment is on every level artificial out of the gate. Attempting to mimic real life on a one to one basis while always and inevitably lead to a less realistic final product. In order to correct for the essentially artificial substrate that every game exists on, additional artificial aides are a requirement.

I propose that something like the ARMA zoom being put into the game, allowing the player to zoom to about 50 degrees or so FoV. This will result in a less acuity than one will get with magnified optics such as binoculars, so this does not invalidate their use by making them redundant. The zoom function would serve to provide a instant intermediate zoom that better represents to the player what human vision would tactically be able to see.

At the very least this should be a optional feature.

My doctor told me I have plenty of tear but the evaporate in left eye in 2 seconds and in 5 in right eye. Got meibo prescription.

did it consistently for 30 days 4 times a day but then it ran out. It didnt seem to do anything but make my eyes feel sticky. I did not detect any improvement at all. Because of the cost I waited another month before refilling the prescription.

I am now on my second bottle and 2 weeks in I feel nothing has improved

When does this start to work?

So as of this moment I do not have a bunch of data on this and really just want to start a conversation about this because I suspect that the in game behavior is wrong, any perhaps getting a discussion going might increase the chances of changes being made if they are warranted.

The performance of AAA guns vs cruise missiles in this game seems excessively pessimistic. When I say AAA for the purposes of this conversation, I am excluding stuff like CIWS. I mean stuff like 40mm to 130mm guns such as the 5 inch guns on most US destroyers etc.

I have almost never seen flak in this game down a missile. You can have a dozen ships pouring fire on the same group of missiles or even a single missile starting at very long ranges and never hit anything. Most of the time AAA is so ineffective against missiles that it might as well be not there at all.

I do not except 127 guns to the ideal weapons for shooting down anti ship missiles, but I suspect that their current uselessness is not realistic.

1. Most of these guns in this game are still radar directed and have proximity fused ammunition.

2. The targets of are the size of airplanes. Many Soviet anti ship missiles for instance, are enormous. These types of guns were entirely capable of providing decent air defense against aircraft, so why not missiles that are almost the same size?

3. Many of the in game missiles are flying in a straight line and do not have jammers or countermeasures of any sort.

Basically, I find it more than a little hard to believe that something like a P-15 or a Shaddock are virtually invincible against AAA. The P-15 isn't all that fast. And speed doesn't really matter much to intercepts when you are flying more or less straight, especially for a radar directed gun.