Helicopter flight model from TakeOnHelis

[5LEvEN 11]

I personally (as this is a SIM) think every aspect should be properly simulated :) ....

Primarily vehicles need work, both air and ground vehicles are not properly simulated, but the maps are just to small for proper aircraft simulation to be honest. Ground vehicle simulation is a different story though, it is very plausible, but it would render aircraft useless. Unless the aircraft are properly simulated. Infantry, I would say are already simulated very well. Yeah there is still a lot of things you cannot do that you should be able to do, but those are minor things, and current simulations do have their limits.

[stk2008 14]

Agreeing with this.

I have DCS: Black Shark so its not that i cant or doesnt like realistic flight model. Its just that it would be weird with one deeply simulated part and not in the other areas.

Plus if ARMA had the depth of TOH then why would people buy TOH? Sure other islands and missions, but as we all know we can make islands and missions.

Dont think that will happen, but you never know with BIS. :)

As said by some one else.

Lets say you own ToH and want to use the flight model in ARMA2 you can because you own ToH if ya want to run a server using this you can do this to and all other peeps connecting can do so as its server side?.

Would be great I would purchase ToH any ways but even more so if I could use the flight model in ARMA2 :).

The reason I say it will work in MP providing the server/dedi server has ToH is my mates probably wont purchase ToH but they do own ARMA2 etc etc.

[metalcraze 290]

Agreeing with this.

I have DCS: Black Shark so its not that i cant or doesnt like realistic flight model. Its just that it would be weird with one deeply simulated part and not in the other areas.

You mean like having a deeply simulated infantry and everything else on arcade level? That didn't break the game for 10 years now, why an optional chopper physics would?

Plus if ARMA had the depth of TOH then why whould people buy TOH? Sure other islands and missions, but as we all know we can make islands and missions.

TOH is a civilian chopper game. With its own separate gameplay that doesn't involve blowing stuff up. With interactive chopper parts and cockpits. Why would people who want to blow stuff up buy TOH in the first place?

Or does TOH sells me a chopper physics and nothing else?

This has been discussed multiple times already.

Edited June 25, 2011 by metalcraze

[Daniel 0]

Marek's stated that he expects BIS' new ventures to feedback into Arma 3. So while I wouldn't begin to expect a full heli sim within Arma 3, I do expect choppers to handle more realistically compared to Arma 2. I don't expect several control types though, I think they'll try and find a happy medium where it's easy enough to get from point A to point B and fire some rockets, but still takes time and skill to master.

[max power 21]

Marek's stated that he expects BIS' new ventures to feedback into Arma 3. So while I wouldn't begin to expect a full heli sim within Arma 3, I do expect choppers to handle more realistically compared to Arma 2. I don't expect several control types though, I think they'll try and find a happy medium where it's easy enough to get from point A to point B and fire some rockets, but still takes time and skill to master.

They have stated that render to texture has already come from TKOH, and features that feed back into ArmA do not necessarily mean flight models or other such things. So far it's only been technology coming from VBS or TKOH that they have announced, like tracer particles and stuff like that. Who knows, though.

Edited June 25, 2011 by Max Power

[subs17 9]

You see there is a small problem , Arma 3 is not a flight sim :) . I have nothing against a pre flight check and some turbulence , but let's face it , Arma isn't even a proper infantry simulator

Nope you are 100% incorrect Arma is indeed an infantry simulator infact its closer to a full battlefield simulator in most aspects. From the infantry perspective it covers most things particularly in the ACE mod. If you compare it to other FPS it is well beyond in all aspects. It even includes the boring bits which is a major feature IRL.:D

---------- Post added at 07:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:29 PM ----------

This.

If I have to use the TakOH flight model in ArmA 3 I'm going to cry... a lot...

You would find its actually easier to fly than A2s FM if done correctly considering all the featured helicopters are modern so most will have FBW. Complexity can also be scalable as well in most flight sims so a new pilot should be able to start off easy and work his way up to more complex operation. The way to master a sim like DCS KA50 is to start off with the basics and learn new stuff as you go. DCS KA50 is very simple to fly(it flys itself with autopilot;)). The weapons in DCS KA50 are also simple to operate with 3-4 buttons to operate the weapons. Not hard the complex aspects are actually ABRIS and the startup(easily bypassed with auto start button).

[Big Dawg KS 6]

You would find its actually easier to fly than A2s FM if done correctly considering all the featured helicopters are modern so most will have FBW. Complexity can also be scalable as well in most flight sims so a new pilot should be able to start off easy and work his way up to more complex operation. The way to master a sim like DCS KA50 is to start off with the basics and learn new stuff as you go. DCS KA50 is very simple to fly(it flys itself with autopilot;)). The weapons in DCS KA50 are also simple to operate with 3-4 buttons to operate the weapons. Not hard the complex aspects are actually ABRIS and the startup(easily bypassed with auto start button).

So what? That doesn't mean ArmA 3 has to use the level of fidelity that TakOH uses. It's still going to be unnecessary for the gameplay in ArmA 3 and thus should not be standard (if it's only an option I don't really care).

[Daniel 0]

So far TakOH really isn't that much more difficult than Arma 2 anyway (once you're set up properly). I was making carrier landings with mouse and keyboard within a few attempts. The jump in flight model from Armed Assault to Arma 2 was much more noticeable.

Of course I expect that to change once they start adding features like wind and turbulence to their full effect, but I don't expect to find those in Arma 3. So unless they really want to keep the TakOH flight model unique to TakOH (which would be understandable), I don't see why they'd have to nerf the Arma 3 flight model.

Edited June 26, 2011 by Daniel

[Mr. Charles 22]

I am all for a serverside setting to fully allow the Take On simulation setting. Autotrim and the likes should be disabled. For this to happen we must also get rid of the simple TAB-Fire mechanics, tho.

[liquidpinky 11]

With auto trim set to on it isn't to unlike Arma 2, I only have difficulty with what seems like ground effect while landing.

I thing auto trim should be a client side option.

My attempts with full noobmode active, including a rough landing with autohover switched on.

1XwWv6z5KyQ

[Daniel 0]

Honestly, I think auto-trim should be enabled at all times in Arma 3, unless a pedal input is selected.

[liquidpinky 11]

Honestly, I think auto-trim should be enabled at all times in Arma 3, unless a pedal input is selected.

Players should be allowed to decide for themselves, unless server hosts demand the real setting.

And plenty of flight sticks have rudder axis too, no need to limit it to pedal owners.

[PASTOR 0]

Imagine if it actually took skills to pilot a helicopter in this game, instead of the current arcade model. Imagine if you actually had to train to become a skilled pilot. Imagine if you could implement combat helicopters in co-op scenarios without them dominating completely because of the current dumbed down model........(etc. etc.).

Yes I agree!

Flight model, driving model should be as realistic as possible. If BI were to implement a realistic flight model into Arma3 (even Arma 2 in next patch (hopeful)) I would be overjoyed! Think of the possibilities when wrecking havoc online compared to current flight model: A blackhawk, or littlebird with a skilled pilot would be able to go from full speed to a dead stop, land, unload a platoon of players and get out of there within a few seconds. With the current flight model this isn't possible (or at least I've never managed to do this).

Edit: This should of course be a serverside optional setting

Edited June 27, 2011 by PASTOR

[NoRailgunner 0]

Highly doubt that BIS are going to give all of the TOH flight model/physics/features for free to Arma3. Key features like "Authentic Flight Model" should stay unique selling points. Guess less people would buy TOH just because of the campaign and missions. ;)

But its a nice dream to be able to play a big sim with all kinds of vehicles, aircrafts and stuff on a average pc.

[dmarkwick 261]

It should also be borne in mind that ToH will have been released for around 6 months by the time ArmA3 is released, so any fear of unnecessary crossover on features are diminished.

[irishrocky 10]

realistic mode would be great... namely on point based servers ( like Domination ) where you get extra points for playing hard core... Also; would be fun to get pin point precision BUT something like this would be difficult with lag in all forms which can plague Arma depending on the server your on.

[wolfbite 8]

Take on landing make me fear for my chopper integrity...... Landing on slopes is a lot harder in take on..... But It calls for improvement on my part....

[liquidpinky 11]

Something else I noticed with Take On, no more bailing out. You are in that heli until you land it or crash it, a good thing in my opinion.

No more bail out snipers, and probably a pretty good incentive to learn to fly them better.

[Leon86 13]

Just tried the preview today, it's awesome. Flying and landing with keyboard is fine as long as you have autohover and autotrim. I'd even vote to disable autotrim/autohover on the highest difficulty level.

[wolfbite 8]

With keyboard I'd say you need autotrim..... Autohover is something I've always tried to avoid using.. as it isnt really needed.... But F*ck holding x for my whole flight :P

[MAX123 10]

YES

ARMA 3..........Simulation Games ?

Please simulation !!

[maddogx 13]

YES

ARMA 3..........Simulation Games ?

Please simulation !!

Indeed! It's a SIMULATION! That must be the answer to all our problems!

BIS, please give Arma3 all the features of Silent Hunter, Steel Beasts, Flight Simulator X and also DCS:Black Shark - except not just for the KA-50, but for ALL helicopters that EVER existed. Also, it should run at >100FPS on our old 8800GTs on maximum settings (30km VD etc.). And don't you dare half-ass the PhysX implementation! We want that shit hardware accelerated on our AMD GPUs, no excuses!

Why? Because it's a SIMULATION!

[froggyluv 2136]

BIS, please give Arma3 all the features of Silent Hunter, Steel Beasts, Flight Simulator X and also DCS:Black Shark - except not just for the KA-50, but for ALL helicopters that EVER existed...

Yes and please don't forget the Mother of all sims -The Sims!

I'd pay top dollar to fly a fully simulated Commanche thru an online Sims room -oh the possibilities...:rolleyes:

[MAX123 10]

ARMA 2 OA = DLC

ARMA 2 : BAF

ARMA 2 : PMC

.....Like

ARMA 3 = DLC

ARMA 3 : Helicopter

ARMA 3 : Airplane

ARMA 3 : Vehicle

whether ?

[sethos 2]

Indeed! It's a SIMULATION! That must be the answer to all our problems!

BIS, please give Arma3 all the features of Silent Hunter, Steel Beasts, Flight Simulator X and also DCS:Black Shark - except not just for the KA-50, but for ALL helicopters that EVER existed. Also, it should run at >100FPS on our old 8800GTs on maximum settings (30km VD etc.). And don't you dare half-ass the PhysX implementation! We want that shit hardware accelerated on our AMD GPUs, no excuses!

Why? Because it's a SIMULATION!

Seriously, shut up.

Stop being such a princess. A refined flight model has been made, it's based on the very same engine and it has now been proved it's very easy to port it over - What in the seven depths of hell does that have to do with having to R&D every aspect of simulation? This is ripe for the taking, why not do it.

And if having more simulation aspects in a COMBAT SIMULATOR scares, you picked the wrong game. No matter how much you let those salty tears run down your rosy red cheeks, you're playing

a simulator and the engine it was built on was designed for actual military training. So whenever they can implement anything that adds to this simulation, they should.

Edited June 27, 2011 by Sethos