[Arclight]

Originally Posted by Xrundel

Arclight, buddy - I never had any intentions to upset you or feel bad. You did very good job transforming stock periscope into something much better and more historically accurate. You've made a mod and people are free to decide if they want to use it or not, correct? I installed your "regular" version of your mod first and I started historical mission that set up in clear day at 12 o'clock.

It looked to me like midnight with full moon. I even checked the clock on user interface. And this is all I was trying to say. I install your "light" version and naturally ask myself why you even needed to come up with "light" if everything is the way it suppose to be, but it does not matter. I found better solution and happy with it. It also have darker attack periscope compare to observation but it looks more natural to me. And it's only my opinion. And you have all rights to have yours. You like mathematical formulas and apply them to figure out outcome? That's very good, my friend. But if outcome is not exactly what it really is in practice - then maybe some input values are wrong or there is simple error in calculation. Such an errors cost NASA extra trip to Hubble on near-Earth orbit. If NASA can do it - I think every one else can .

If you still insist that you have absolutely correct brightness interpretation in your scope mod - fine with me - my life won't change a bit. Maybe later in you life you will have opportunity to look through real periscope and that will be much better than thousands words from me or anybody else.

Never insisted on anything. I've always stated I modeled them as accurate as I could get them, to the best of my knowledge. I never said they were 100% realistic. I mean, it's called "more realistic periscope". Picked that name rather carefully.

The problem we were having was because you introduced yourself a little rudely. You made quite a few asumptions, not nescesarily accurate ones at that, and the insults are just not nescesary... not here, anyway. Feel free to insult people at that /v/ or whatever it is.

Now to quotes:

Alright.

You got it very close indeed, very good job! Especially darkening optics towards the edges.\, where light losses are greatest.

Thanks.

I was not avoiding this point. Probably I was not clear enough with my bad English. You CAN and you HAVE compare periscope of any historical period with the telescope. Because as long as there is magnification (1.5x and 6x as you know) it is long focal distance refractor with added two mirrors/prisms on it's optical path to bend it 90 degrees twice. You can call it viewing pipe, periscope, telescope, half of binocular spotting scope - it is refractor and principal is absolutely the same with only difference that telescope refractor can change eyepieces for more powerful ones(with shorter focal length) boosting magnification to hundreds x but accordingly reducing brightness of the image. So - less magnification - brighter image.

I'm not arguing the principal isn't the same, the point is that on one of those periscopes there are severe restrictions regarding light coming in, since the head needs to be small to avoid detection.

It ties in to your remark on the scopes being impossible to use at night not being realistic. That's a statement I simply can't agree to. (at least, they would be useless unless you had a cloudless sky and the target within about a mile)

In my opinion (that you can just ignore if you want) rename "light" version into "regular" and make another slightly lighter - "light" and that would be more realistic. Just answering your question - I know you are not going to do anything.

And by the way - if TDW uses your version as default in his UI - it looks just fine. Maybe I've downloaded some original release that was much darker and all this talk here just as pointless as it could be.

Ah, see, you got me all wrong. You said yourself you don't just take someone's word for anything, neither do I. It's easy to come on a board and claim all sorts of things, so if some observations are a bit blunt, it gets greeted with some skepticism. Right?

But now you make a proposal. I'm open to those, and that one got me thinking: I've recently switched from an old CRT 4:3 monitor to a LCD 16:10. Would probably be a good idea to see how it plays on this one, especially considering most people use widescreen LCDs these days (God knows why though :P).

See what comes from that, pretty sure it's going to look a lot different on this monitor.


And the versions got progressively darker I think. TDW might have nabbed an earlier one for his project.