Adjust NERC symbology to be darker

[spacenano]

What is the current situation?

Too bright!

What is the proposed change?

Make darker compared to images, I have a better image but cannot share. Active sector will remain a tad brighter for now but could be made an option for full realism in the configurator maybe at some point.

Reference materials (e.g. screenshots)

Additional context

N/A

[JYang365]

Another reference image, from the same source as above

[JYang365]

Adding on, the 'detailed' tag item shown in the real world display does not match the one in the Controller Pack. On the reference, only the Callsign, AFL and Intention Code are shown. However, on EuroScope the Callsign, AFL, Intention Code and GS is shown. Could this be reflected?

Also, the sector numbers seem to be showing on the radar display. With S36 being shown above S6 (depicting upper and lower sector). Not sure if this is something that should be added, as obviously in VATSIM 90% of the time it will not be split up that much. Still can be useful information, especially with the rollout of vacs

[Liaely]

Also, the sector numbers seem to be showing on the radar display. With S36 being shown above S6 (depicting upper and lower sector). Not sure if this is something that should be added, as obviously in VATSIM 90% of the time it will not be split up that much. Still can be useful information, especially with the rollout of vacs

Whilst we would be able to call every sector in VACS, some sectors are permanently bandboxed, even when taking into account event-only positions (those that require a TI), and to document in sufficient clarity the various constituent sectors/splits would take significant effort and unnecessarily complicate various elements when they are rarely used, and some will never be opened in force.
The VACS setup will not feature every possible sector; whilst it will handle the majority of TIs without modification, it is expected that for unusual splits some profiles may need adjustments in order to support their use not via the telephone directory.

As such, this would likely be more of a visual point, though given its nature, it may be worth further consideration as to if it should be included before it would be added.

[JYang365]

Whilst we would be able to call every sector in VACS, some sectors are permanently bandboxed, even when taking into account event-only positions (those that require a TI), and to document in sufficient clarity the various constituent sectors/splits would take significant effort and unnecessarily complicate various elements when they are rarely used, and some will never be opened in force. The VACS setup will not feature every possible sector; whilst it will handle the majority of TIs without modification, it is expected that for unusual splits some profiles may need adjustments in order to support their use not via the telephone directory.

As such, this would likely be more of a visual point, though given its nature, it may be worth further consideration as to if it should be included before it would be added.

Yes, definitely agree. Could maybe look into having the sector number being shown as an option in the Configurator?

[spacenano]

Adding on, the 'detailed' tag item shown in the real world display does not match the one in the Controller Pack. On the reference, only the Callsign, AFL and Intention Code are shown. However, on EuroScope the Callsign, AFL, Intention Code and GS is shown. Could this be reflected?

Also, the sector numbers seem to be showing on the radar display. With S36 being shown above S6 (depicting upper and lower sector). Not sure if this is something that should be added, as obviously in VATSIM 90% of the time it will not be split up that much. Still can be useful information, especially with the rollout of vacs

Looks like the image you've used isn't used for controlling. Also none of those tags are detailed, they are all 'untagged' in euroscope lingo. Our current tag setup is correct. The reason GS is shown is for unconcerned aircraft is so that it shows for incoming traffic (concerned/yellow) aircraft, unfortunately this is a compromise due to ES limitations.

[spacenano]

Whilst we would be able to call every sector in VACS, some sectors are permanently bandboxed, even when taking into account event-only positions (those that require a TI), and to document in sufficient clarity the various constituent sectors/splits would take significant effort and unnecessarily complicate various elements when they are rarely used, and some will never be opened in force. The VACS setup will not feature every possible sector; whilst it will handle the majority of TIs without modification, it is expected that for unusual splits some profiles may need adjustments in order to support their use not via the telephone directory.
As such, this would likely be more of a visual point, though given its nature, it may be worth further consideration as to if it should be included before it would be added.

Yes, definitely agree. Could maybe look into having the sector number being shown as an option in the Configurator?

This can be done via a TopSky map shortcut, don't need everything as an option in the configurator.

[JYang365]

This can be done via a TopSky map shortcut, don't need everything as an option in the configurator.

Would this TopSky map then incorporate the usage of the ACTIVE: function (based on controller ID), or will it simply be a toggle-able function, in the TopSky maps?

My thinking was that not every controller may want this, due more clutter, therefore having it in the Configurator may be something that is considered. Maybe having it enabled in views 2, 3, and 4 is also something that can be done? Just thinking of all possibilities 🙂

[JYang365]

Adding on, the 'detailed' tag item shown in the real world display does not match the one in the Controller Pack. On the reference, only the Callsign, AFL and Intention Code are shown. However, on EuroScope the Callsign, AFL, Intention Code and GS is shown. Could this be reflected?
Also, the sector numbers seem to be showing on the radar display. With S36 being shown above S6 (depicting upper and lower sector). Not sure if this is something that should be added, as obviously in VATSIM 90% of the time it will not be split up that much. Still can be useful information, especially with the rollout of vacs

Looks like the image you've used isn't used for controlling. Also none of those tags are detailed, they are all 'untagged' in euroscope lingo. Our current tag setup is correct. The reason GS is shown is for unconcerned aircraft is so that it shows for incoming traffic (concerned/yellow) aircraft, unfortunately this is a compromise due to ES limitations.

Ah yes, sorry. I meant the 'tagged' type, in reference to the 'untagged, 'tagged', and 'detailed' options in the ES Tag Editor. I'll have a look at this more myself as I believe the 'tagged' type are for aircraft that are concerned. Thanks for pointing this out

[spacenano]

Only true when Allow concerned aircraft tag untagged is unticked. Usually best to keep core tag behaviour as is.

You will need to check weather this allows redundant tags to be collapsed.