Arma 3 Helicopters DLC Discussion (dev branch)

[blackpixxel 53]

And one of the should have wheels, so it could be an osprey, but also a CH53k, which I would like much more! Maybe both? :D

[odie0351 67]

I'd love to see official BI posts stating such facts. I can't just let my own reasoning boil down to what I want as facts, sadly. My stomach will continue to turn until I see BI posts confirming. :(

I did keep in mind that they're both considered medium lifts. I just wasn't thinking about to what extents. I guess it's to each is own in how the Valor's looks are viewed. My head is just clouded by how much I just want the Osprey to show it's pretty face. Preferably in two flavors: One with the ramp gun with lifting capabilities and the other with both the ramp and the belly mounted guardian.

I did make an earlier post about wanting a "futuristic" Osprey. If that means slimming everything down, giving it more armaments and the hull of a Blackhawk, I could live with that, definitely. I just really want to see the Osprey. In all its iconic glory.

And that big beautiful medium gray ass. #FS35237

Yeah the key word in my statement there is "if" the Osprey is what we're getting, and I certainly hope so, just wanted to make sure it was known why the Valor shouldn't be there. Wouldn't even be too heart broken if BI does like they did with the A-10 and try's to give it a futuristic flair(I've got visions of the V-25 from End War with the Wipeout's paint scheme running through my mind:cool:). While I would be happy with just about anything at this point...even a ported CH-47 wouldn't catch too much griping from me right now, I'm still not really on board with the CH-53K. Don't get me wrong the H-53 series are some beautiful aircraft and certainly have they're merits for the job; ridiculous lifting capabilities, massive cargo hold(especially the new King Stallion), its combat proven, and whether you go the Marines route and mount M3 50's or the Air Force Pavelow style with Miniguns, the H-53 has some serious defensive armament possibilities! But I'm still against it being used because I don't like the idea of a Marine helo being used without a whole Marine faction, not when there are other options that would be more fitting. Some might be thinking "hell you can say the same about the Osprey and the Marine thingy" but the thing there is the Osprey is also being used by the Air Force who use it to support special operations, which in my opinion would be even more reason for it to be used in the current setting. But then again who knows, BI could "leak" a screenshot in a few days and it be something completely outta left field and have us all scratching our heads:confused:

[Bee8190 10]

on the Valor's appearance, she's certainly got a military look to her!

I don't like it either and support the notion that it looks every bit like civilian air vehicle for the riches

[nullrick 10]

Yeah the key word in my statement there is "if" the Osprey is what we're getting

That's what I get for reading posts past 3am when work kicked my ass the day prior. Felt like I was drunk compared to now.

Edited August 22, 2014 by Nullrick

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

LOL, nice one @Nullrick, i feel you.

No but seriously, BIS, if your going to do DLC's, then at least do what everyone else is doing. It's almost September which is release month so i say throw us a trailer or something. Pretty please with cherries on top and a box of the finest Czech Alcohol or what ever. Lol

Also, if you pay attention to the crashes, the wrecks have names, and one noticeable few are the C-( i forgot, but it's the transport plane) and the other is just called VTOL i think. So it's possible they might add in something along the lines of the C-192 i think it was, or the Osprey, and just call it the VTOL. But, i would personally like to see some new aircraft, not anything we've used already, at least for official assets for now. Maybe add the things we've already seen later in. But, yeah, the CH has retractable landing gear, and so does the VTOL. They stated one of them at retractable landing gear.

Edited August 23, 2014 by DarkSideSixOfficial

[wtmitchell 10]

I wanted to try the new helo flight models so i loaded the Dev branch to check them out. I don't know what I'm doing wrong, but no amount of hitting left shift or pulling up on the collective will get the engine to start. I can see the collective going up and down in the cockpit animation, so i know my controls are set up properly and are being recognized. I reverted back and forth between the release version and the dev version, and the controls work as expected in the release version.

I don't see a keyboard command for starting the engine or any of the more advanced startup commands used in TOH, but I'm obviously missing something. This was in the Helicopter scenario, but I get the same results in a Workshop mission.

[CaptainObvious 95]

Action menu -> Start Engine

[blackpixxel 53]

Collective does not start the engine anymore, to let you do autorotation landings.

Engine on and off is currently a scrollwheel action. So you have to use that, I hope that there will be the option to bind this to a key in the future.

[pettka 694]

I wanted to try the new helo flight models so i loaded the Dev branch to check them out. I don't know what I'm doing wrong, but no amount of hitting left shift or pulling up on the collective will get the engine to start. I can see the collective going up and down in the cockpit animation, so i know my controls are set up properly and are being recognized. I reverted back and forth between the release version and the dev version, and the controls work as expected in the release version.

I don't see a keyboard command for starting the engine or any of the more advanced startup commands used in TOH, but I'm obviously missing something. This was in the Helicopter scenario, but I get the same results in a Workshop mission.

The keyboard command has been added in the game engine just recently, our UI specialists are implementing it into the Configure part of the game. You may use action menu meanwhile as a temporary solution :icon_twisted:

[haleks 8204]

Action menu -> Start Engine

The well named CaptainObvious. ^^

[wtmitchell 10]

Ahh, so I wasn't going crazy (though there was some hair-pulling). Many thanks for your replies!

[CaptainObvious 95]

The well named CaptainObvious. ^^

At your service! :icon_twisted:

[deltagamer 612]

A VTOL helicopter would make sense for ArmA 3. I don't think BI will do the V-22 as they said something about heavy transport helicopters, so hopefully we could expect a quad VTOL helicopter just like the Osprey. One could only wish for that though.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

My bet goes to the massive helicopter the marines use that can carry like 60 crew plus Humvee attached or something like that.

[Sterlingarcherz101 15]

LOL, nice one @Nullrick, i feel you.

No but seriously, BIS, if your going to do DLC's, then at least do what everyone else is doing. It's almost September which is release month so i say throw us a trailer or something. Pretty please with cherries on top and a box of the finest Czech Alcohol or what ever. Lol

Also, if you pay attention to the crashes, the wrecks have names, and one noticeable few are the C-( i forgot, but it's the transport plane) and the other is just called VTOL i think. So it's possible they might add in something along the lines of the C-192 i think it was, or the Osprey, and just call it the VTOL. But, i would personally like to see some new aircraft, not anything we've used already, at least for official assets for now. Maybe add the things we've already seen later in. But, yeah, the CH has retractable landing gear, and so does the VTOL. They stated one of them at retractable landing gear.

Just as long as they keep the guy that did the "futuristic" style on the a10 wipeout miles away from any new models. He should have been made fetch tea for a month. And wear a pointy hat with a big D on it.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Just as long as they keep the guy that did the "futuristic" style on the a10 wipeout miles away from any new models. He should have been made fetch tea for a month. And wear a pointy hat with a big D on it.

Ahaha.... ahahahahaha... Ok, i kinda agree with you, i hate the intakes on the Wipeout, looks that that alone would be anything but Aerodynamic, and it looks heavy as hell. Models aside, i prefer when they stick with real life, modern, and draw board content. Meaning it's not fake, it exists, as a practical application. Anyhow... Lost my train of thought for a second...

OH, that's right. BIS, please, at least add the Engine on as a cockpit interaction. Why? Because using the action menu for something like that, as well as having to bind another key, is going to get annoying rather quick. So i would at least. At least, some simple look at button in the cockpit, and flip the engine on. That's my only thing as of now really.

EDIT: Patiently waiting sling loading and shooting from vehicles. I really hope shooting from vehicles (mainly helicopters) isn't going to be a main stream scripted thing, although, it might certainly be. Why, because it'd be annoying if that were to be disabled widely, when in real life, nothing is going to stop someone from shooting off the side of an open helicopter when the opportunity provides itself, which bring a new set of skills to the Arma series, as a form of not just Offense, but Defense.

[roshnak 41]

I don't see any reason to implement a system for cockpit interaction just to be able to turn on the engine. It's the kind of thing you do so rarely that it could be bound to some far away key like Delete or Home and it wouldn't make a difference.

[vegeta897 13]

I think the action menu is just fine for turning on an aircraft. Unless of course you have pending satchel charges nearby.

[chortles 263]

Ahaha.... ahahahahaha... Ok, i kinda agree with you, i hate the intakes on the Wipeout, looks that that alone would be anything but Aerodynamic, and it looks heavy as hell. Models aside, i prefer when they stick with real life, modern, and draw board content. Meaning it's not fake, it exists, as a practical application. Anyhow... Lost my train of thought for a second...

OH, that's right. BIS, please, at least add the Engine on as a cockpit interaction. Why? Because using the action menu for something like that, as well as having to bind another key, is going to get annoying rather quick. So i would at least. At least, some simple look at button in the cockpit, and flip the engine on. That's my only thing as of now really.

EDIT: Patiently waiting sling loading and shooting from vehicles. I really hope shooting from vehicles (mainly helicopters) isn't going to be a main stream scripted thing, although, it might certainly be. Why, because it'd be annoying if that were to be disabled widely, when in real life, nothing is going to stop someone from shooting off the side of an open helicopter when the opportunity provides itself, which bring a new set of skills to the Arma series, as a form of not just Offense, but Defense.

We can at least guesstimate from the VBS3 implementation that it'll probably be limited to specific seats (I.e. never the pilot/driver, possibly not co-pilot or gunner who is able to take controls -- unless the two options are mutually exclusive) on each vehicle. Speaking of which, the VBS3 manual only mentions wheeled vehicles and armor, no helos, so in that sense Arma 3 > VBS3...

I don't blame the artist behind Wipeout, he probably realized that the "infantry centric" team leadership wouldn't call him out on it...

[leftskidlow2 10]

My main issues right now are the manual trim and random wind directions. With a Saitek X-52, I had to use Joy2key to set manual trim keyboard commands to the joystick hat and then map them in Arma3. There was more to it than that but I'm trying to keep it simple. I'm of the opinion that it is very important to map cyclic trim to a joystick hat vs joystick X,Y,Z position because it creates a cognitive reference point to how the rotor disc is configured. I also do not think that the anti torque pedals should be a part of trim. I've only flown smaller helicopters but there was no trimming for the pedals. Once you get used to it, the pedals are a great kinesthetic indicator for how much power you have left to pull. The wind... I have no idea what's going on, I do a flyover and scout out the LZ and the wind can be drastically different a couple hundred meters away. The good thing is that wind doesn't matter that much without settling with power/vortex ring state simulation.

[Gutsnav 13]

We can at least guesstimate from the VBS3 implementation that it'll probably be limited to specific seats (I.e. never the pilot/driver, possibly not co-pilot or gunner who is able to take controls -- unless the two options are mutually exclusive) on each vehicle.

What if the driver / pilot needs to defend himself? Like if the front window gets blown open by some angry farmers at a roadblock, he'd be a sitting duck. He should just be able to duck and fire out the windshield while reversing or something.

[Brisse 78]

He should just be able to duck and fire out the windshield while reversing or something.

That's impossible. Either you focus on driving, or you return fire from stationary vehicle, but both at same time is impossible.

[chortles 263]

I wouldn't agree for IRL, Brisse, but that is the current implementation in VBS3 -- passengers/gunners in wheeled vehicles, and gunners/commanders in armored vehicles.

Gutsnav, do you have any other games in mind where the driver can both drive and shoot in first-person while manually aiming without aim assist? If so, I'd like to hear just how they implemented these, because right now the VBS2/VBS3 implementation is the only official (not counting ShackTac Littlebird Enhancement mod) take on shooting-from-vehicles in Real Virtuality and therefore what my expectations are based off of.

[Brisse 78]

I served as a driver in a quick reaction force, and I can safely say that with the equipment we had, it was not possible. I guess I could draw the G17 if a threat came really close to the vehicle though.

Edited August 25, 2014 by Brisse

[chortles 263]

There's no mention in VBS3 of being limited to a long gun, so while I would say that what you describe should be at least possible, VBS3 doesn't support even that.