Plane and Helicopter handling

[ProfTournesol 956]

I think flying should be a skill. As of right now everyone can pick it up within a few minutes of practice. I would like to see flight mechanics and gameplay similar to microsoft flight simulator.

God no. This game isn't about those kind of simulation. It could be better (or more realistic as Gnat suggestions), but it must remain easy.

[[frl]myke 14]

I think the best approach would be to have difficulty options. So people can chose if they would prefer a simplified handling or the complex behaviour.

In MP, server would dictate the setting, allowing clients to have the complex behaviour if they want (and simplified is set on server) but the other way around, if server is set to complex, simplified would be overridden.

Hope you get the point.

IMHO this is the only way to cover all needs. Server owners that prefer realistic settings can set it accordingly while servers for "casual gamers" can stick with the simplified setting, not pissing off the players.

[metalcraze 290]

BIS should include both simplified and advanced flight physics.

Simplified can be used in more "casual" missions while advanced may be used by clans that have dedicated pilots (and a lot of clans do) because usually those are people who play serious flight sims and it will only be fitting.

But BIS should totally remove that auto-hover thing regardless.

[Beagle 684]

BIS should include both simplified and advanced flight physics.

Simplified can be used in more "casual" missions while advanced may be used by clans that have dedicated pilots (and a lot of clans do) because usually those are people who play serious flight sims and it will only be fitting.

But BIS should totally remove that auto-hover thing regardless.

But Helos have autohover these days...!!!

[metalcraze 290]

Helos do not have autohover at 300 km/h

[nodunit 397]

Flying is already a skill. Sure, everyone can pick up an aircraft and start flying but the vast majority doesn't know the finer tricks or even some basic things.

Very true, and it can sometimes take even some time, I remember introducing a CSS friend to Arma2 via demo, trying to get him to pilot a helo, showed it and explained to him how the basics worked but he always had difficulty with nose planting or side dipping..

Personally I love a good challenge, the more difficult the object is to become better with the more it is rewarding for the effort, piloting in say crysis feels very dull compared to arma2's more free and less 'friendly' flight model.

Beagles right, helicopters do have autohover and in fact some have various hover modes.

[SASrecon 0]

I would love to see some kind of module for more realistic flying/simulation of certain parts of the game (ot: and a bonus would be some sliders which allow more user-friendly interactions with modules, as opposed to setting variables with script e.g. different weather types can be adjusted more easily by adjusting certain sliders) and this module could have a slider which allows mission designers choose if the pilot role should be played by a skilled player who requires more advanced vehicle interactions and play a more important role in the mission or just has a very simple transport role for example in a mp mission like berzerk where many pilots tend to ditch/eject from their vehicle after reaching their destination and the heli just respawns.

Perhaps the mission designer can even let the player decide, so for example players who aren't up for joining a clan but want a challenge of just taxi-ing teammates from respawn to action with a more twitchy flight model, however with the current model imho this role becomes boring quite quickly.

Just an idea which has probably been mentioned but from my pov, it would definitely not hurt the game and maybe even enhance ArmA's aspect of the 'jack of all trades' with regards to simulation but not for a small hardcore niche nor a playerbase who wants some bf-style fun who end up killing their passangers due to the beloved fly in and eject over enemy tactic or just because some noobie thinks that instead of practicing in the editor they think it's a good idea to practice flying with a chopper full of infantry :rolleyes:

[BobcatBob 10]

You know how BIS can make the game more realistic and difficult without alienating ANYBODY?

1.On top of all of the other difficulties make a difficulty called SIMULATION, so ultra-realistic fans like myself can enjoy, (make all difficulty options 100% configurable anyway (serverside) or if necesary a mission author (some scenarios may require certain options that arenot in vehicles outside of sim-uber-realism mode.

One difficulty options could be auto-start where in a vehicle that requires any sort of complex start up, would be automatically performed by the players avatar in real-time so some CAS/QRF response times could be accurate w/o someone having to memorize a 10minute start up sequence. (the player would just hit the start-up function from the popup menu) maybe a quickstart option as well so some parts may be skipped like pre-flight checks if you are in a real hurry (maybe a 10% chance of any systems failing if you do this)

2.BIS should make good in-depth training missions for normal and sim modes.

[b00ce 160]

Judging by past quotes and such, I think it's safe to say that BIS doesn't want to make flying exclusive for flightbuffs. They want it accessible.

It will still be accessible to people who care enough to practice. I wouldn't be nearly as good as I am now without my HOURS UPON HOURS doing nothing but flying around in the editor. Like I keep saying; if someone is truely intent on learning to fly, nothing will stop them. Humans are capable of great things, never underestimate peoples' ability to learn and adapt. The only people it would really discourage are the people who hop in and fly off and jump out at the AO, that's not a bad thing.

Proper crash simulation - not just a huge explosion. Especially for helicopters, to see the rotors come apart would be amazing. If they were hit by a stinger then the huge explosion would fit the scene there.

FUCKING THIS!!! Nothing pisses me off more than miscalculating, having a minor rotor strike and exploding.

Flying is already a skill. Sure, everyone can pick up an aircraft and start flying but the vast majority doesn't know the finer tricks or even some basic things. Do you really want to make flying roles unplayable for most of the time? Considering that a very big portion of wannabe pilots in Arma 2 today somehow always manage to screw up landings and basic air-to-air tactics, cranking up the technical simulation will seriously limit the practical possibilities in mission making.

God no. This game isn't about those kind of simulation. It could be better (or more realistic as Gnat suggestions), but it must remain easy.

They won't be unplayable for people who actually care wand want to learn. YES, the learning curve will be steeper, but saying people will NOT learn is ludicrous.

Myke;1946133']I think the best approach would be to have difficulty options. So people can chose if they would prefer a simplified handling or the complex behaviour.

In MP' date=' server would dictate the setting, allowing clients to have the complex behaviour if they want (and simplified is set on server) but the other way around, if server is set to complex, simplified would be overridden.

Hope you get the point.

IMHO this is the only way to cover all needs. Server owners that prefer realistic settings can set it accordingly while servers for "casual gamers" can stick with the simplified setting, not pissing off the players.[/quote']

BIS should include both simplified and advanced flight physics.

Simplified can be used in more "casual" missions while advanced may be used by clans that have dedicated pilots (and a lot of clans do) because usually those are people who play serious flight sims and it will only be fitting.

But BIS should totally remove that auto-hover thing regardless.

Not only does that make unnecessary work for BIS but when people who are used to flying the easy setting go on multiplayer servers with the HARD setting, they'll think they can fly and fail miserably.

Having difficulties that completely change the game WILL split the community and alienate people. Having those settings will do more harm than good. People are not idiots, generally at least, they are capable of learning new skills. And if the tutorials for the new, more difficult, features are any good, people will know what to do and how to do it.

TlDr:

People will learn. Making the difficulty optional will make WAAAAAAY more work for BIS and split the community.

[celery 8]

They won't be unplayable for people who actually care wand want to learn. YES, the learning curve will be steeper, but saying people will NOT learn is ludicrous.

People who are good or excellent pilots are a small minority at this moment. That number can only go down and the number of players able to fly at all will plummet when more simulation aspects are brought along. Yes, some people will still be able to operate aircraft well, but they will be such a small minority that mission designers simply cannot rely on the presence of a pilot able to do a critical task even in a fraction of played games, even less so in PVP missions where air superiority matters. I have played in large scale PVP tournaments and it's telling that even guys who are considered (by themselves and others) to be hotshot pilots will do stupid mistakes (crashing into trees, too hard landings, bad paradrops), costing lives and very often turning the tide of the battle in the enemy's favor.

Edited June 5, 2011 by Celery

[ProfTournesol 956]

They won't be unplayable for people who actually care wand want to learn. YES, the learning curve will be steeper, but saying people will NOT learn is ludicrous.

God, i didn't say that, stop making smart comment please. I just don't want flying to be much harder than today.

Edited June 5, 2011 by ProfTournesol

[dmarkwick 261]

Proper crash simulation - not just a huge explosion. Especially for helicopters, to see the rotors come apart would be amazing. If they were hit by a stinger then the huge explosion would fit the scene there.

This could possibly be solved simply by BIS implementing PhysX in a way that exposes its functionality via scripting.

That way, a modder could intercept a crashing helo and instead of the usual crash/explode/death that always happens, perhaps the helo body could be subject to PhysX animation instead. This would allow for survivable crashes.

[b00ce 160]

You're blowing things out of proportion. People will still be able to fly, increasing the difficulty is not going to magically kill the community. And missions without 20 pilot slots would be a change for the more realistic because 9 times out of 10, in real life, people drive (Or even ruck march) the 6 - 12 miles (10 - 20 km) to the AO, they don't usually fly.

It's a win win.

---------- Post added at 10:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:47 AM ----------

God, i didn't say that, stop making smart comment please. I just don't want flying to be much harder than today.

Why not push the boundaries of your ability? You WILL get better and you'll look back at the "old days" or go and play OA and realize how piss easy it can be.

And for the record, I want BIS to work on all simulations equally. Cars and tanks are just as important as, if not more important than, aircraft.

Edit: and it was directed at both of you.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Why not push the boundaries of your ability? You WILL get better and you'll look back at the "old days" or go and play OA and realize how piss easy it can be.

Nevermind.

Edited June 5, 2011 by ProfTournesol

[bospor 0]

The best products in our days are the ones that let the consumer have options. Perhaps it is a good idea to make each area of the game (infantry, flying or armor) adjustable. Let the player decide what he wants to be - a hardcore pilot or arcade master. We already have some small level of that in the game when setting up the difficulty. Lets take it to the next level.

Each MP server can also pre-set certain conditions to the game. I know it's more work for the developers, but this should make the Arma an iconic customization game. With it's editor is almost there, but to end all the debates over who's tank is better or simulator vs arcade, just let the players set it up themselves.

[Cyteless 10]

I think it'd be nice to have an everything simulator. I don't think BIS should hold themselves back if they're trying to go for higher realism. If anything, it'll attract a lot of people from different communities. People who play sim-games like DCS will be interested in playing Arma because of increased flight immersion. If driving simulation is improved, then people from communities that play the likes of rFactor will be interested as well.

So yes, I would agree that realism should be pushed for. As far as gaining accessibility to this level of realism is concerned, it would require BIS to make appropriately in-depth tutorials, and a lot of practice by the player. I'm not saying I'm the greatest of pilots, but I'm certainly not the worst. My in-game piloting ability has been gained from practice. Arma shouldn't be a game you can just jump on and be instantly good at. That's not what it's supposed to be (from what I gather :p).

[elvinjones 10]

I also play simulators, and think it would be great to have more realism in the air.

But as some have pointed out, the maps are too small to feel very immersed in high speed aircraft, so until Arma has bigger maps, simulation should have proportionately less importance.

Air is still Battlefield like in that you capture some air base and fly out from 500 or 1500 meters from behind a firefight.

[b00ce 160]

But as some have pointed out, the maps are too small to feel very immersed in high speed aircraft, so until Arma has bigger maps, simulation should have proportionately less importance.

Air is still Battlefield like in that you capture some air base and fly out from 500 or 1500 meters from behind a firefight.

You do realize that Lemnos is a solid 4.5x the size of any other Vanilla map, right?

The best products in our days are the ones that let the consumer have options. Perhaps it is a good idea to make each area of the game (infantry, flying or armor) adjustable. Let the player decide what he wants to be - a hardcore pilot or arcade master. We already have some small level of that in the game when setting up the difficulty. Lets take it to the next level.

Each MP server can also pre-set certain conditions to the game. I know it's more work for the developers, but this should make the Arma an iconic customization game. With it's editor is almost there, but to end all the debates over who's tank is better or simulator vs arcade, just let the players set it up themselves.

ArmA is not, repeat NOT, an arcade game. And adding a lesser functionality WILL detract from the overall gameplay. No, I'm not talking about splitting the community (It'll happen if you get your wish.) but I'm talking about the resources BIS has to put into adding the option. It's going to cut down on the quality of other areas. I do NOT want to see the overall gameplay of ArmA 3 suffer because of, what is effectively, a crutch for people who don't want to better themselves. (Like the obese person in in the super-market who uses the scooter so they don't have to walk to get their twinkies and icecream, that then complains about how they're fat.) :mad:

[dmarkwick 261]

It's gotta be a game first, with options to ramp up the reality. That's just the way it's got to be.

Game's got to sell, and as long as the options/moddability are there, it'll all be good :)

[kylania 567]

Flying should be a point and click on the map affair and NOE flight and a dramatic spiraling landing under fire should be quick-time-evented automatically into the gameplay.

Wait.. what?

[b00ce 160]

It's gotta be a game first, with options to ramp up the reality. That's just the way it's got to be.

Game's got to sell, and as long as the options/moddability are there, it'll all be good :)

The game WILL sell, even if the options aren't there. Adding the option to dumb things down is WAY more work for BIS and splits the community. A lose - lose. ArmA is a SUMULATOR, BIS should treat it as such and be as realistic as they possibly can. Some people may not be cut out for flying, yes. But guess what? The same goes for real life too. ArmA is not JUST about flying. Flying is 1/3 of the overall gaming experience. I don't want to see ANY part of the game sacrificed for the sake of flying, or making things "easy".

[demonized 20]

if pilots want full simulation in the flying they can buy TOH wich BIS will make compatible with Arma3 and players can fly with their TOH controls...............

This way, BIS gets to sell more games, Arma3 base is kept intact for everyone new and old, and the simmers gets their 247 buttons to fly with if desired.

Going the elitist way by force will hurt BIS financially and cut down the active player base, and is a bad move, Arma games is a very specific niche, its is far from the mainstream of global players, it needs to keep a level head, and the current way is a good middleground for sim and nonsim.

[Cyteless 10]

Yes, but helicopters and planes are also a very specific niche. If there's only a few people that can fly them, that fits in with the idea that there aren't many available. Since infantry are the predominate units, then there will be fewer helicopters and planes.

If someone wants to learn how to fly a helicopter, they need to learn how to fly a helicopter. This sorts out the problem with public Domi where someone jumps on, steals a helicopter, and leaves it out in the field, leaving everyone else back at base, either having to wait for it to respawn, or trek out to the AO instead.

If they had to learn how to fly a helicopter, they'd have to devote their time to that, and so are a required asset for the team, since no one else knows how to use it. If you've spent all that time learning how to start up and fly it, then you'll want to make as much use out of it as possible, and not just dump it in the field, after the several minutes it takes to get the helicopter up in the air.

[paecmaker 23]

They should have like in IL 2 sturmovik. If you want to play like an arcade you can change the settings and controls and you can do that but you can also make it the other way.

Me, I think that the helicopter controls are kinda good, easy to learn but hard to master.

The people that want it to be as realistic as real plane simulations remember that those games have only one sort of playable vehicle and not like ARMA where you both take action as a foot soldier. Its all a balance act.

[Macadam Cow 1]

I'm still convinced the only way to increase the ArmA fanbase is to make ArmA more appealing to other simmers, not to others FPS gamers.

It's been stated before but if they improve the realism of aerial vehicles it will interest people from DCS, FSX,...If they improve the ground vehicles it will interest the - quite small - Steal Beast community, and so on.

ArmA will never be appealing for CoD/BF/MoH players, that's just not the the kind of fun they're looking for.