Why did the L-159 make the cut but the F-35F didn't?

[trent 14]

Was it the quality? No, the F-35F model looked as good as the Buzzard's and check out the L-159's A3 cockpit with the A2 version:

http://s13.postimg.org/5neqyt45z/comp.jpg

Aside from lighting I really don't see any difference. It still has only one hitpoint and no PiP displays. Don't mistake this as an argument for the L-159 to be cut as well. I've given up any hope of aerial vehicles being enhanced for A3, and I wouldn't be struggling with half-working A2 ports if I didn't think A2-level quality wasn't good enough.

Was it the weapons? No, the pbo files show the F35 used the same ones as the L-159 (GBUs, ATGMs, ASRAAMs).

Balance? No, there is no singleplayer campaign for it to unbalance. Jets in Arma aren't developed enough to have individual unique attributes aside from a better turning rate and more missiles. And it's not like the F35 could unbalance the game any more than 2 of 3 factions having no jets at all.

A game-stopping bug unique to the F35 unit, maybe? No, a direct-feed stage demonstration showed it flying around just fine.

Maybe it was a late addition? Nope! Appeared in some of the very first media and got a lot more screentime than the L-159. In fact let's remind ourselves just how prominently it featured:

vs

Is there any plausible explanation?

[purepassion 22]

I ask myself the same question but don't really have an answer...

To me, it would be plausible if it is the AAF's fighter and NATO/CSAT get their own GenX fighter.

Edited August 12, 2013 by PurePassion

[da12thMonkey 1943]

Maybe they finally decided they want to make an F-35 model that actually looks like an F-35 and not the X-35B

[zooloo75 834]

The truth is meaningless.

Edited August 12, 2013 by zooloo75
Meaningless Edit.

[purepassion 22]

All these axed features and now content already made is being removed...

Please keep such meaningless comments to yourself. They add nothing to the discussion. There are reasons why the Buzzard is in the game but the F35 isn't. We are here to get to know why.

[Varanon 892]

I would guess the F-35 is an Arma 2 model with relatively low texture resolution and polycount, while the ACR model is higher resolution... so the F-35 would have to be updated to today's standards still, while the L-159 already is... Same goes for the Osprey, I guess...

[Trauma.au 10]

Would be great to get an official reason as to why we only have 1 jet and more importantly what the future of jets is for Arma 3. Can't help but feel like BI are avoiding the topic.

[kylania 568]

Would be great to get an official reason as to why we only have 1 jet and more importantly what the future of jets is for Arma 3. Can't help but feel like BI are avoiding the topic.

We're getting that with the next SITREP this week.

[Trauma.au 10]

We're getting that with the next SITREP this week.

Oh really, where was that said? I must have missed it.

[purepassion 22]

E.g. here

Please note that our focus is on Arma 3's launch content, so questions about the campaign will be addressed at a later date. The status of fixed-wing aircraft in Arma 3 will be detailed further in the next SITREP.

[Trauma.au 10]

Yea I never read that thread lol, thx.

[b00tsy 28]

In the next SITREP there will be said that they were just trolling us and in fact have a dozen of jets ready for us to play with :dancered:

[Braaten 1]

In the next SITREP there will be said that they were just trolling us and in fact have a dozen of jets ready for us to play with :dancered:

I honestly hope that is the case :/

[nmdanny 22]

The only reasonable explanation I see is that they don't have an equivalent jet for the OPFOR team(the L-159 is not comparable to the F-35)

Other than that, the F-35 from A2 seems to be in higher quality than the L-159 according to what I've seen from the sneak peek.

[Varanon 892]

The only reasonable explanation I see is that they don't have an equivalent jet for the OPFOR team(the L-159 is not comparable to the F-35)

Other than that, the F-35 from A2 seems to be in higher quality than the L-159 according to what I've seen from the sneak peek.

I think the interior of the A2 F-35 sucks compared to the later models. Exterior texture don't matter that much anyway, since they would have to be redone for the appropriate camo pattern, aynway

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

I just pray that if the Osprey is included at some future point it has the correct flight model with yaw included - not being able to turn left or right at the correct rate while in the hover made it virtually useless.

[scarecrow398 43]

I just pray that if the Osprey is included at some future point it has the correct flight model with yaw included - not being able to turn left or right at the correct rate while in the hover made it virtually useless.

Sounds familiar, oh yea, every helicopter thread since OFP has been complaining of this :P

[Cytreen 14]

I just prey that they include the flight models from Take on Helicopters as the current one is trash. Proper flight physics is a must for both fixed wing and choppers. I would love to see the F-35 come in at some point. Maybe bis will release most of the stuff they cut with the campaign DLC but overall the flight physics need to be on par with Take On. Arma is a nich game and i understand they want to go more mainstream to sell more but for the love of god dont sacrifice quality of the product that most of this community has been asking for sense OFP. (shooting from moving vehicles/flight physics). Its not like we are asking for a fully functional THADS system for the Comanche or networked targeting systems that Gen 5 fighters have.

If they really need something to compete with the F-35C and the F-22. Why not give Op4 the PAK FA and the F-313. Maybe the Chengdu J-20. I mean we are talking about the future and yes i know it will be much longer than 2037 before toughs aircraft are operational and fielded but cant we make the exception for the armaverse. I imagine Op4 are going to be russia/iran/china so to speak.

Edited August 13, 2013 by Cytreen

[max power 21]

I believe they have said that they won't be including the Take On flight model at least for a while. They were citing difficulties and performance concerns.

[Cytreen 14]

I believe they have said that they won't be including the Take On flight model at least for a while. They were citing difficulties and performance concerns.

Thanks for the info max i have been looking every ware as to why and could not find anything. I do hope that they can get it working even if it means moving to GPU based physics. (as long as it works on both AMD and Nvidia)

Given the new sitrep at least they are upfront about it and that means allot to me. Im fine with them adding in content later through patching but i do not want to see them go the way of the DCS series and nickel and dime the player base through DLC. Dont get me wrong i love DLC only when its worth it. The best DLC for arma 2 for me was the ARC but sense light version was not included in in a official patch it was imposable to use the content on any server.

[max power 21]

I'm just repeating something I heard. I don't know if it reflects the current situation or what.

[chortles 263]

As far back as around a week before the public alpha, DnA rolled back the state of the TOH FM to "may be only in the engine for use by Editors and not used by any official aircraft/in the campaign".

[max power 21]

Yeah, I think on the E3 feed what they said was slightly more pessimistic. It seems to change. I think a good outlook would be that they will do what they can, but it sounds like it's an extremely big thing to worry about while they're getting the rest of the game working properly. For instance, I would hesitate to posit that they would waste time even talking about an advanced flight model while they're worrying about getting the campaign or AI working properly.

[sjaba 19]

Being as many here a long fan of the Arma series i was particularly sceptical about the futuristic approach as i really did not see the point ( i do understand the "artistic freedoom" it gives, but still) . The one thing that i saw on the positive side with the futuristic setting, was that NOW FINALLY the fixed wings would be brought into atleast this current decade. What I was missing is not a bunch of new fancy models or even better flight physichs ( we got modders and DCS for that :) ), but a better system to combine ground and air elements and to have some more " weapon systems" to work on from the pilot seat. As a bear minimum i thought we would have a working cockpit with the most basic instruments/ ( as we have for choppers) and MFCD that are more then just eye candy ( navigation, map etc) , now that even boats have a fancy PiP LCD screen.

I do realize that im posting this way to early and that there is still a realistic hope for something better, but with the Buzzard released, panic set in and i could not help my self. I mean, yes it does take off and it is a fixed wing, but it cannot by far live up to Arma 3 expectations or other current released hardware.

Just to end my little panic attack on a positive note..ALTIS is just a dream come to for an airhead like me and given my experience with the arma series it will all be good, it will just take some time. I mean, look at arma2, its peaking just about now ;) So for us who are in this for the long run, i think we have A LOT to look forward to. The release is just the begining.

Sjaba...

P.s wet dreams are allowed in forums, so here comes mine. On EXPERT settings, as a pilot you have to work the cockpit for atleast a few minutes to get the bird ready for action, and that ground forces could actually send 9 line information via datalink to the pilots MFCD system...Now that would make my day

Edited September 4, 2013 by Sjaba