call_911 10 Posted May 23, 2011 Back n the day when i was in the Cav, we spent lots of time setup in an overwatch position an the like an would typically run off battery power(til needed) mind u we did battewry/power checks every so often for readiness, usually at Stand2 in the morning an nite an usually every vehicle in the unit did it. In ArmA it's not been that way with all vehicles as soon as u traverse the turret etc that forces the engin to turn on. For realism sake plz have a realistic system utilising eng/battery managment etc. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZeosPantera 0 Posted May 23, 2011 It was very annoying having vehicles start everytime an AI twisted the turret. I could only see that being the case on Hydraulic turrets. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KorpeN 0 Posted May 23, 2011 Why to make the game so complex? I think there are some limits between fun-realism and ultimate realism-annoying. This feature will take the game a step into annoying. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Higgings. 0 Posted May 23, 2011 Hydraulic pumps can very well work on electric, most tanks has it that way. I dont know if I am all to keen about that battery stuff, it just brings back bad memory of my first Land Rover 90" in winter time, until I got new battery :D Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RSF TheCapulet 59 Posted May 23, 2011 Why to make the game so complex? I think there are some limits between fun-realism and ultimate realism-annoying. This feature will take the game a step into annoying. Go play Halo, and stop flaming feature request threads. More realism in a SIMULATOR is never a bad thing. I agree with the post and wouldn't be a real difficult achievement. A bit of scripting/bug testing and it's done. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KorpeN 0 Posted May 23, 2011 Go play Halo, and stop flaming feature request threads. More realism in a SIMULATOR is never a bad thing. I agree with the post and wouldn't be a real difficult achievement. A bit of scripting/bug testing and it's done. No, you go play real life and join the marines. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Splintert 10 Posted May 23, 2011 So long as it isn't annoying I'm cool with it. Players shouldn't be able to sit in a spot for more than 10 minutes twisting the turret around, but it should charge fast enough that you don't need to travel 10 minutes to get the battery up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dysta 10 Posted May 23, 2011 Go play Halo, and stop flaming feature request threads. More realism in a SIMULATOR is never a bad thing. No, you go play real life and join the marines. And you two go pull off the plugs, and see what happens on your computers. If there's no battery, go grab another (Like ARMA 2's laser designator did). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alex72 1 Posted May 23, 2011 Its not making the game ultra realistic just because the engine is quiet during turret swing. I have to say it's a bit annoying when the engine goes on and off as you sit somewhere and have to scan around. Addons fixed this in every game of the series, and it would be sweet with it done stock in AA3 imo. :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel 0 Posted May 23, 2011 Why to make the game so complex? I think there are some limits between fun-realism and ultimate realism-annoying. This feature will take the game a step into annoying. There's nothing complex about it. What's annoying, is the engine sparking up whenever the turret moves. It's a good request. Casual players probably wouldn't even notice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rangerpl 13 Posted May 23, 2011 Only driver should have the option to turn the engine on/off. It's not that hard to do and it would be simple, if the gunner moves the turret you could have some quiet humming sound to show that you're on APU/battery power. To turn the engine on, you'd have to hop to the driver's seat. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
call_911 10 Posted May 24, 2011 Also guess i nvr really paid attention but it seems like in OFP/A1 days the AI would react differntly towards a vehicle with eng off(white veh name) an Red/Green eng on. Don't quote me but least seems like i remember that somewhere. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
5LEvEN 11 Posted May 24, 2011 Yeah, I find the moving of the turret on the Abrams and the engine turns on is annoying... I think what call 911 said would be a nice realistic feature to add. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiggum2 31 Posted May 24, 2011 Its the same as with the *über complex medic system* in another thread... Why should you simulate such a minor thing while great (and more important) parts of the game are unrealistic (hitpoints on vehicles ?) and would need improvement first. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rye1 21 Posted May 24, 2011 Why should you simulate such a minor thing while great (and more important) parts of the game are unrealistic (hitpoints on vehicles ?) and would need improvement first. If they do improve vehicle hitpoints then maybe they'll improve other vehicle features like this as they are doing it. It's all a case of time and practibility. Just as long as the system is quicker and more refined that the ACE system with batteries, it's a pain to use the range finder - swap to weapon and go back to put the battery back in, wait for it to load, range then repeat. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OB1 10 Posted May 24, 2011 Its the same as with the *über complex medic system* in another thread...Why should you simulate such a minor thing while great (and more important) parts of the game are unrealistic (hitpoints on vehicles ?) and would need improvement first. Its not minor, giving away your position or indicating to the enemy that your vehicle is active when your engine turns on is a big deal.. Im all for this idea. Great request ! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZeosPantera 0 Posted May 24, 2011 Why should you simulate such a minor thing while great (and more important) parts of the game are unrealistic Basically. All parts need improvement and need to be worked on forever until it is as real as real. That is what I love about simulators, Games can only be judged as games but a simulator ALWAYS has room for improvement. What we are discussing is the order of those upgrades. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beagle 684 Posted May 24, 2011 Its not minor, giving away your position or indicating to the enemy that your vehicle is active when your engine turns on is a big deal..Im all for this idea. Great request ! The real annoyance here is not the fact that engines turn on with turret movement..its the fact that you suddently appear as a red dot on Radar if your engine turns on...THAT's the problem. But a surveillance mode with APU or Battery should be simulated indeed. But the real problem is the magic radar we see in ArmA II still. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OB1 10 Posted May 24, 2011 The real annoyance here is not the fact that engines turn on with turret movement..its the fact that you suddently appear as a red dot on Radar if your engine turns on...THAT's the problem. But a surveillance mode with APU or Battery should be simulated indeed. But the real problem is the magic radar we see in ArmA II still. yes agreed, this also needs to be addressed. I think the radar system has to be canned on some vehicles... since when did a UH-60 gunner have a radar ?? and the A-10 doesn't even have a radar... They use Jtac and a TGP... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RSF TheCapulet 59 Posted May 24, 2011 Its the same as with the *über complex medic system* in another thread...Why should you simulate such a minor thing while great (and more important) parts of the game are unrealistic (hitpoints on vehicles ?) and would need improvement first. Well, probably because this would take 6 or less lines of code and a new sound or two, while a full vehicle hitpoint system would be a major feature, likely taking months to plan, create, and test. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JojoTheSlayer 35 Posted May 25, 2011 I think they should add startEngine=0; to the vanilla turrets of tanks so the engine dosent start while the turret turns. Since most armor in Arma2, with the exception of some like the T34, can operate the turret at the same speed on batteries its not unrealistic. I would like it better though if they could also slow down turret movement (crank speed) on tanks that didnt have electrical engines when main engine was off or even make the electrical engine something you could damage so you needed to use crank to turn. And lets not forget a Command Menu 6 option to tell the driver to turn the engine off. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
