Will Arma 3 be able to support Formation Flying

[rainbird 1]

HKFlash: I think you've already made it clear which you prefer when you made your rather ignorant claim that one of the greatest flight sims ever made (Falcon 4) "sucked". Not sure what purpose there is in reiterating that opinion, other then to be a fanboi troll. Or do you honestly think that your ill-informed opinion counts?

Edited July 2, 2012 by rainbird

[onlyrazor 11]

Tread carefully, folks.

[Echo38 1]

Falcon's flight model used simple vectors. (One lift vector per aircraft, I believe--for comparison, Aces High II uses 32 lift vectors per aircraft, and A.H.II is far behind DCS.) Unless your modders rewrote the engine pretty much from the ground up, Falcon's still vector-based. DCS, on the other hand, uses fluid physics. So, again, unless the Falcon modders somehow rewrote the whole physics system, there's no possibility of this BMS thing being even close to as realistic as DCS, since they both have the same level of avionics/systems detail, while the latter uses a good fluid physics system--perhaps not as good as Rise of Flight's, but considerably better than the acclaimed X-Plane's airfoil wedge thing and miles ahead of just about anything else. Really, whenever anyone says that Falcon--even modded Falcon--has good flight characteristics, I immediately suspect a bias originating in sentimental nostalgia. [shrug]

Edited July 3, 2012 by Echo38

[rainbird 1]

Echo: Yes, "my modders" possess the source code and rewrote an entire dynamic physics based flight model for the F16, using NASA studies, F16 aerodynamic data and equations. All information is in the link I provided, if you care to at least scan it, before disputing facts.

Falcon 4/BMS is not a simple mod hack, a large portion of the code has been rewritten and the code recompiled.

Edited July 3, 2012 by rainbird

[Echo38 1]

Thanks for the info. I might check it out sometime. Although I'm not a fan of the F-16 because of its full-authority fly-by-wire/AoA limiter, it'd be nice if there were a good alternative to Eagle Dynamics' DRM antics. TBH, I'd rather support a company that develops a sim that's "pretty damn good" and has honest business practices, than one that develops a sim that's "close to perfect" but riddles it with malware. (I'd also much, much rather have a realistic flight sim with out-of-date graphics, than a pretty one with a bogus flight model, but this comparison doesn't apply to this particular pair of sims.)

Edited July 3, 2012 by Echo38

[rainbird 1]

Echo: Yep, its largely a matter of taste. The sim experience of flying a DCS's Warthog vs that of and BMS's F16 are quiet different. I own them both but just prefer the F16 and, in particular, Falcon 4's dynamic campaign. But they are both great sims and you should definitely give Falcon 4/BMS a spin sometime, it's improved quite a lot in recent years.