Helicopter flight model from TakeOnHelis

[Haystack15 10]

So DCS automatically cancels out FSX because they both simulate flying, but DCS theoretically offers more?

I'm really quite dumbfounded at how you could compare A3 with ToH even if the only thing that they actually have in common which affects the gameplay itself is the Helicopter Flight model. I don't know how many times i've said that ToH has different/IMMENSELY bigger maps than A3's one, that it is completely civil focused to appeal to the simmers who DON'T have a boner for blowing stuff up.

I think you forgot that fact that reason why I was comparing TOH to A3 was because of hypothetical thoughts. :rolleyes:, Plus I never did say that "(because "hypothetically" A3 has the same flight model as TOH, it will cancel out TOH.)"

What I "Did" say is "If A3 does have the same flight model as TOH, people might be more tempted about buying A3 because it has a Realistic Helicopter Flight model with a fully featured combat sim.

But I want to re-quote myself on something I said earlier

BTW I could be wrong.

That also includes my entire hypothetical situation as well ;)

[sethos 2]

Yes, I'm playing a military simulator - Let's get rid of crummy driving and flying physics.

Even if they do add that flight model to ArmA 3, I'm still getting Take On.

[Innomadic 10]

What I "Did" say is "If A3 does have the same flight model as TOH, people might be more tempted about buying A3 because it has a Realistic Helicopter Flight model with a fully featured combat sim.

I think you are also missing the basic point i'm trying to get across. Not everyone wants a combat sim in a smaller environment in which combat specific missions are the norm just because it has the same flight model from a sister game.

If you wanted a realistic flight model, and thats it, buy ToH. If you want to blow stuff up? Buy A3.

I'm getting both because i know that the detail in the Helis in ToH will be far superior to whats in A3 (NOTE: Detail =/= flight model, there is a difference), and having the ToH flight model in A3 will make carting around troops, supporting as Commanche, that much more enjoyable compared to previous Arma games.

They are both aimed at separate markets and gamer demographics. Not everyone wants a military sim with their helicopter sim.

EDIT: OR i used your statement in general because there are so many similar ones to choose from...

[Haystack15 10]

I think you are also missing the basic point i'm trying to get across. Not everyone wants a combat sim in a smaller environment in which combat specific missions are the norm just because it has the same flight model from a sister game.

Then if that is true, Then this is were my Repeated quote comes in.

BTW I could be wrong.

I'm getting both because i know that the detail in the Helis in ToH will be far superior to whats in A3 (NOTE: Detail =/= flight model, there is a difference), and having the ToH flight model in A3 will make carting around troops, supporting as Commanche, that much more enjoyable compared to previous Arma games.

I see what your saying there, That's something you will like to see, Lets also look at it like this too, Not everyone wants a realistic flight model in A3. The ArmA Series was never suppose to simulate flight controls.

Here, a user by the name ThudBlunderQ8 pretty much explains how I feel about Realistic flight controls in ArmA.

Putting it into context, ArmA (and OFP) was never really going to be sold as a helicopter flight simulator so why push it in that direction? Flying helicopters involves skills which take a few hundred hours to get firmly fixed in the long-term memory; no gamer is going to want to make that sort of time-investment just to make a sim workable. BI don't assume every user is an expert infantryman or tank driver, so they simplify the sim to make those roles accessible. Why shouldn't they simplify helicopter flying so that it gives just a semblance of reality?

To be honest with you, Yes, it would be nice to see improved flight models in ArmA, and Yes there will be some people that would like to have a Realistic Flight model in ArmA. But at the same time, There will be people that don't want to take the time to learn how to fly a helicopter just to drop some troops off an X amount of distance away and be done with the helicopter.

I'm totally getting what your trying to say, But I'm also looking at it from a negative stand point of what "I" "myself" Think about it.

Edited June 14, 2011 by Haystack15

[sethos 2]

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. Imagine if pilots in clans actually had some merit to their title, instead of the current model where every Joe could get into a helicopter and fly it, even with the keyboard.

Imagine if ArmA being a milsim actually meant something other than infantry simulation.

I had a dream ...

Oh and people who think ToH will have some extreme DCS model need to think again. They moved towards the realistic side but it's not even in the same stratosphere at this point.

[dmarkwick 261]

Oh and people who think ToH will have some extreme DCS model need to think again. They moved towards the realistic side but it's not even in the same stratosphere at this point.

Is this based on anything other than idle conjecture?

[sethos 2]

Is this based on anything other than idle conjecture?

You'll see.

[dmarkwick 261]

You'll see.

I don't think it's a great revelation, DCS is a study sim after all.

[sethos 2]

I don't think it's a great revelation, DCS is a study sim after all.

First you question it, then you agree to it, make up your mind.

[Uglyboy 10]

He probably questioned your apparent clairvoyance about a game in alpha stage, not the fact that a studio like DCS is "probably" more able to deliver a realistic flight simulation.

[sethos 2]

Well, he said it, DCS makes study sims - Hardcore simulators. The fact that ToH has so many helicopters should already tell you, it won't even be close in detail and function, that's just fact, because DCS usually focuses on one aircraft and then goes all-out with details, function and usability. So it was just applying common sense. So he then questions a factual statement pretty much and then backs up my claim a post later.

People sound like a new flight model will complete change ArmA. The current flight model is so arcade, it's almost cringe-worthy. Why can't we have a model that has more weight to it, more feel in the stick and has more external effects on the aircraft like torque effects, downwash and even basic wind effects. Borrow the basic's of ToH just to get some more feel into the helicopters, make them more realistic to fly. Make flying helicopters a more authentic experience and give people an incentive to train to become excellent pilots in the game, instead of just a few flight-hours and you can master pretty much everything. Nobody is calling for ultra-realistic controls that requires a DCS Black Shark like start-up procedure and having to go through a 500 page manual to keep the bird in the air and fire off one missile. Keep all the basic missile lock, basic take-off but make the core flying experience more authentic and difficult.

Edited June 14, 2011 by Sethos

[dmarkwick 261]

First you question it, then you agree to it, make up your mind.

Oh don't worry, my mind is made :)

[Haystack15 10]

People sound like a new flight model will complete change ArmA. The current flight model is so arcade, it's almost cringe-worthy. Why can't we have a model that has more weight to it, more feel in the stick and has more external effects on the aircraft like torque effects, downwash and even basic wind effects. Borrow the basic's of ToH just to get some more feel into the helicopters, make them more realistic to fly. Make flying helicopters a more authentic experience and give people an incentive to train to become excellent pilots in the game, instead of just a few flight-hours and you can master pretty much everything. Nobody is calling for ultra-realistic controls that requires a DCS Black Shark like start-up procedure and having to go through a 500 page manual to keep the bird in the air and fire off one missile. Keep all the basic missile lock, basic take-off but make the core flying experience more authentic and difficult.

I agree with what your saying, You basically want a improvement on the current model. Majority of the ArmA players does, Including myself.

[sethos 2]

I agree with what your saying, You basically want a improvement on the current model. Majority of the ArmA players does, Including myself.

Yes, still feel they should talk to the guys working on ToH to improve it. I mean, they claimed the flight model was 'improved' in ArmA over Operation Flashpoint but let's be honest, it was just as shoddy, they just changed the axis pivot. So just share some experience and knowledge with the ToH crew and truly improve the ArmA model without taking it too far, yeah :)

[subs17 9]

Yes, still feel they should talk to the guys working on ToH to improve it. I mean, they claimed the flight model was 'improved' in ArmA over Operation Flashpoint but let's be honest, it was just as shoddy, they just changed the axis pivot. So just share some experience and knowledge with the ToH crew and truly improve the ArmA model without taking it too far, yeah :)

Thats absolute bollocks, OFP you could only use mouse to fly so regardless of FM it still sucked to fly. In Arma we could use a HOTAS but with Arma2 it has multicontroller support so I can use my rudder pedals as well as HOTAS to fly and although its basic compared to DCS KA50 it is outstanding for an FPS. Any assumption that TOH would have a crap FM you have to wait until its released before judging it. Arma2 has a better FM than the FSX EH101 BTW from my point of view. TOH FM can be easily updated by its devs and could evolve upto a DCS level sim. My advice to BI is make it possible to combine TOH with Arma3 in MP(they must use a similar engine because you can walk around in TOH) that way the hardcore pilots can fly with FPS in A3. Such a combination should also allow TOH to fly in A3 world and A3 to operate in TOH world. Speaking of FM the JSF has a better FM than the A1s fixed wing aircraft.

---------- Post added at 11:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:37 AM ----------

So DCS automatically cancels out FSX because they both simulate flying, but DCS theoretically offers more?

I'm really quite dumbfounded at how you could compare A3 with ToH even if the only thing that they actually have in common which affects the gameplay itself is the Helicopter Flight model. I don't know how many times i've said that ToH has different/IMMENSELY bigger maps than A3's one, that it is completely civil focused to appeal to the simmers who DON'T have a boner for blowing stuff up.

Not everyone who buys ToH buys Arma 3 as well. Is it so hard to believe that such people exist?

BI has a big opportunity by allowing both to be combined as it greatly expands the role pilots play in A3. You could have servers that make use of a combined A3/TOH with players making full use of the helicopters features. To assume that players in FSX/TOH because they don't like blowing stuff up is incorrect. In the screenshots I see emergency services and a hoist, missions can incorporate action and don't have to be just flying around like FSX is in MP. If you were a member of a combined arms Clan then you would see the potential.

Clan incorporates its own Army, Navy and Air Force. When Clans have a war often the pilots have to use a separate sim to the FPS and likewise the NAVY. Pilots use Flaming Cliffs2/Falcon4 Allied Forces/DCS KA50/A-10C, Army use Arma 2/ Steel Beasts(in some cases), Navy uses Dangerous Waters/688i etc. To have Arma3 with TOH allows pilots to fly with FPS as it is the limitations are still bad for fast jet though but all the above is probably possible if A3 allowed a combination with TOH and TOJ(Take On Jets:D) it expands A3 alot yet at the sametime could be standalone for those who do not wish for A3 etc. DCS already allows pilots to walk around after ejecting although you cannot yet do anything past that.

[nodunit 397]

Thats absolute bollocks, OFP you could only use mouse to fly so regardless of FM it still sucked to fly. In Arma we could use a HOTAS but with Arma2 it has multicontroller support so I can use my rudder pedals as well as HOTAS to fly and although its basic compared to DCS KA50 it is outstanding for an FPS.

Let us not forgot how rotory aircraft FLEW in OFP, very limited..gravity wasn't as much of a threat, pedal control was too strong , there was an odd "hover above ground" thing built in and they weren't at all agile, why do people keep saying it was better.

When it comes to flight model I have to ask, what exactly do people deem to be a great 'flight' model, is it black shark, is it FSX, is it?..eugh, someone said crysis was the best...

Though seeing certain rules governing helicopters would be neat, attack helicopters able to do loops and flips with more agility like they should, and transport helo's not being able to period since they aren't built for it.

Edited June 14, 2011 by NodUnit

[max power 21]

why do people keep saying it was better.

Classic car syndrome.

Though seeing certain rules governing helicopters would be neat, attack helicopters able to do loops and flips with more agility like they should, and transport helo's not being able to period since they aren't built for it.

The thing with that is that then you have to decide what the limitation is. Do you track mast bumping or boom strikes or just have the helicopter fly apart?

Also, what helicopters do you restrict, and under what circumstances? The CH-53 Super Stallion was doing loops and barrel rolls back in 1968... but surely not when it's loaded.

VC2E8RJE3Jo

The UH-1Y I think ought to be able to do these maneuvers, and I wouldn't be surprised if the blackhawk was capable.

[PASTOR 0]

Realistic flight model please!

The main reason for this, there wouldn't be to many "wanna-be-pilots" wrecking havoc with Kamovs online, as well as the few that actually are able to handle the heli would become demigoods in the game, as the really good pilots are IRL.

realistic flight model with realistic avionics would be totally awesome in Arma 3.

[nodunit 397]

The thing with that is that then you have to decide what the limitation is. Do you track mast bumping or boom strikes or just have the helicopter fly apart?

Also, what helicopters do you restrict, and under what circumstances? The CH-53 Super Stallion was doing loops and barrel rolls back in 1968... but surely not when it's loaded.

The UH-1Y I think ought to be able to do these maneuvers, and I wouldn't be surprised if the blackhawk was capable.

Huh, didn't know something that big could do that. As for the blackhawk, maybe, I've seen a video but after seeing that I wouldn't be suprised either though it makes me wonder why they have different rotor assemblies if that would be the case. (army helicopters I mean)

And demi gods are only so good as they don't have AA around or a few dedicated machine gunners.

[subs17 9]

Let us not forgot how rotory aircraft FLEW in OFP, very limited..gravity wasn't as much of a threat, pedal control was too strong , there was an odd "hover above ground" thing built in and they weren't at all agile, why do people keep saying it was better.

When it comes to flight model I have to ask, what exactly do people deem to be a great 'flight' model, is it black shark, is it FSX, is it?..eugh, someone said crysis was the best...

FM must be based on RL data and the Flight controls need to operate as they do IRL for the aircraft to perform the way it should. DCS KA50 uses FBW so its realistic FM for KA 50 but not other aircraft. A bad example is the FSX EH101 which IRL is FBW, try flying it and its 1000 times harder than IRL. The R22 on the other hand seems to fly the way a real one does(from a real R22 pilot). A FM also needs to behave in certain ways when influenced externally by weather(wind), weight empty/fully loaded/when carrying a Sling Load etc. For FBW like a KA50, Blackhawk or AH64 you also have added features like Auto hover, Auto pilot(multi-channel), Auto turn to target and trim. The advanced FM for the KA50 calculates for each rotor blade as well as the aircrafts weight fuel load and external stores. For a MP perspective such a sim combination allows for pilots to do a better job at flying and at fighting than whats already in Arma2. Maybe with a hoist fast roping is also possible. Maybe BI could consider a logbook with MP accessibility like in Falcon 4 with also the requirement for new pilots on some servers to complete trainning missions before MP access is granted on a server. In other words an actual helicopter pilots licence in game to avoid MP accidents etc Which is unlikely anyway since most guys who buy TOH would probably pass the trg missions anyway.

[-Total- 0]

If possible, it should be an option for a more realistic flight model.

[Innomadic 10]

If you were a member of a combined arms Clan then you would see the potential.

ITT: Assuming i'm not in a clan. I already know its potential, i want it in Arma 3. I'm arguing against the case that the same flight model in ToH and A3 would negate ToH's very existence, i am arguing FOR the increased potential in gameplay satisfaction of pilots due to the use of a realistic flight model. I really do not see where you read otherwise in my post.

Just because i don't have a fancy avatar or signature doesn't mean i don't actively take part in dedicated online play.

Edited June 15, 2011 by Innomadic

[max power 21]

That's a fairly glib interpretation of what the 'other side' is saying, innomadic.

[b00ce 160]

Wishlist for improved aircraft realism:

• Settling with power
  
• Dissymmetry of lift
  
• Wind effecting flight
  
• Air speed, not ground speed
  
• Landing gear that absorbs shock properly
  
• Propellers and rotorblades do damage
  
• Propellers and rotorblades can fly off or disintegrate
  
• Crashes do not cause an explosion unless there is a fuel leak and there is fuel left
  
• Turning the engine off gets rid of torque; stops the heli from spinning w/o tail rotor
  
• Planes take engine damage
  
• Accurate instruments, a little extra effort goes a long way
  

Things I like in the current system:

• The controls (what the keys do and how they effect thrust, peddles, etc with keyboard/mouse)
  
• Auto-rotation is spot on, from what a heli pilot told me
  

Things I do not want to see:

• A maze of switches; I play a lot of DCS, but I don't play ArmA for that level of simulation.
  
• The removal of Auto-hover; however, when the engine is turned off and/or a person gets out it should default to off.
  
• An option to dumb things down.
  

[Innomadic 10]

That's a fairly glib interpretation of what the 'other side' is saying, innomadic.

Didn't need to fully articulate my arguments again.