Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Did we? Nobody told me  :(

Well i did, but i'm fine with people liking the hardcore flight model as long as i'm not forced into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When discussing switching advanced flight model on/off you have to keep 2 things in mind:

  • rotorlib has been transferred over from TOH which was a heli simulator. Unless they purchase and implement an external lib for fixed wing, its unlikely that we will get something as detailed, as this means that they made improvements to their own FM themself. And they are not going to code some advanced airflow thingy for arma... Basic (but physically authentic) flightmodel would be what i would expect when it comes to FM improvements. And that is totally fine. It still would be a dramatic improvement over current FM, which isnt physically authentic whatsoever.
  • Rotary wing flightbehaviour isnt as intuitive as fixed wing flight for people who have never dealt with it. You do not have to counter torque permanently when taking off or flying slowly with a jetplane. You can just increase throttle and take off. With rotary wing you need alot more fine controll (countering torque). Sure you can stall in a fixed wing craft, but that is often quite apparent to solve - more speed, or pulling less hard on the stick. You won't just fall out of the sky through invisible vortex ring state.

In DCS i managed to take off and land the free SU-25 on my very first try, after i checked what the controlls are. I doubt i could have done that at the time with their Huey or Mi-8. Planes are just more straight forward for beginners.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but once you know how to fly a plane (it's good to start with them and then move to helos), it's actually quite intuitive. Once it gains speed, a helo flies almost like a plane, even though "throttle" works on a different axis. Landing is also quite similar, with the exception of the fact that you flare much harder and fly a much steeper glideslope (really, once I realized that, I found my landing accuracy improved greatly). Takeoff can be tricky, but if you've got a runway, you can take off like a plane, as well. The big difference here is hover, which is completely unlike what planes can do and which comes with its own set of dangers such as VRS (BTW, you can disable VRS in the difficulty options separately from AFM). Its an important maneuver, but unless you're doing advanced stuff like landing from hover (yes, it isn't standard procedure by any means) or sling loading, it's not as big of a leap as it seems.

 

I don't know the details of licensing, but I'm not sure if you can just "transfer" rotorlib like that between products. Sure, all the engine-side work was done in TOH, but they probably had to "buy" rotorlib again for ArmA3 (a cost which they then made back on Helicopters DLC sales). Because of that, I think there's a fair chance they'll implement fixedwinglib (from the same company) in a similar manner. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yes, but once you know how to fly a plane

Once you know how things work, they are often easy ... of course. And i have no trouble with helo's or planes. But im talking from a new players perspective. If they can't easily get a handle on it quickly on their own they will disable it, unless they are of the patient "sim type" mentality. Thats where the intuitive/nonintuitive nature comes in. Lets not forget that you have basically "lost" if you dont have analog controlls for adv. Helicopter FM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea like x3kj said, the basic flight model we have now is just easy enough for the majority of players.

 

I think what the AFM was to Heli DLC is what Sensors, radar, tracking etc. is to Jets DLC.

 

Besides, going from BFM with current fire control system to AFM with a vastly improved sensor suite is not going to be easy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know a few people who thought CCIP in jets was an arcade addition an was against the sim  :386:  :391:

 

Yea the flight  model is easy , but its so easy its kind of embarrassing to not even put in some effort to improve it.

 

Yea like x3kj said, the basic flight model we have now is just easy enough for the majority of players.

 

I think what the AFM was to Heli DLC is what Sensors, radar, tracking etc. is to Jets DLC.

 

Besides, going from BFM with current fire control system to AFM with a vastly improved sensor suite is not going to be easy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once you know how things work, they are often easy ... of course. And i have no trouble with helo's or planes. But im talking from a new players perspective. If they can't easily get a handle on it quickly on their own they will disable it, unless they are of the patient "sim type" mentality. Thats where the intuitive/nonintuitive nature comes in. Lets not forget that you have basically "lost" if you dont have analog controlls for adv. Helicopter FM.

I meant that new players should start with planes, then move onto helicopters after learning that. It's a bad idea to jump straight into helicopters. This is something that the training tools don't teach you, but if they did it this way, there'd be no problem with AFM. Oh, and "sim type" mentality is mandatory for even basic infantry operations in ArmA, unless you count KOTH and Life players (I don't). It's not the kind of game which you learn in 10 minutes, and it definitely shouldn't be.

 

While AFM is indeed rather though without a joystick, the arcade model isn't very fun to fly without it, either. ArmA1 was the last game with the FM so simple that it could be easily handled with mouse+keyboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's some pretty good fast jets out there as stand alones, what puts me off using them as AI is their flight envelopes are like a kangaroo, bucking all over the sky, it's fine when you fly them, but terrible when AI don their flight suits.

A3 lacks significant terrain to enjoy Fast Air/jets, unlike the DCS world's, where you can enjoy hours over a vast terrain.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really wish AI could fly planes properly. It should be much easier than infantry AI, since the only concern about terrain is not flying into it (well, that and not launching missiles into it) and threats are much less varied than on the ground. Right now, they can't even take off on their own (need to use UnitCapture for that). Hopefully, the DLC will address that.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe features and improvements are more important.

But there will be new assets so just wondering would there be much interest in a two seater fast air.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said it in the Tanks DLC thread, and maybe needs to be said here, presuming that the ArmA III Roadmap implies this is the next thing coming.

 

I would like playable content with the DLC. What we've largely been getting via these DLCs is playable assets.

 

Please feature a mini-campaign or at least a mission pack that emphasizes the jets. A Showcase isn't enough if you want people to buy it for its content, not its assets.

 

I was able to forgive the earlier model for ArmA III and bought the DLC out of respect for Bohemia's approach, but when Apex kind of skipped on content too for a contested, short campaign, I have a hard time paying money for something that seems like it is just toys for multiplayer. What would make any of the new jets more interesting or more engaging than what we already have, officially or otherwise? What usually helped incentivize it would be the content that came with it, for not many people in the community make scenarios or campaigns that rival Bohemia's works. Pitch the official work more than what the community can come up with. "Three jets!" isn't something a modder couldn't do, for example. Three jets and a well designed bombing mission with it is actually much further than the community would go with.

 

If you want people to support the DLC, make it more than assets. Give us scenarios where we're the Super Omega Delta Squad and have to deal with an aviation skirmish or something. Make it something where the premium content actually comes with a premium experience.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Things i hope we see from this is a better radar system, because the current one is garbage. So having one that can tell use us something in regards to elevation, would be super useful. Also one that doesn't magically detect things, since the current radar is far to effective at detecting ground targets. Plus finally adding a stealth feature in, so vehicle that aren't meant to avoid radar detection now can. Thus radar will mostly be used for air targets, and for ground it will work but you'll have ground scatter and everything looks the same on the radar besides for maybe some size variation.

 

I hope we see is some kind of ECM, so we have some kind of counter to AA systems. Thus maybe on radar we temporary show up as multiple targets, until the radar system readjusts and accurately tracks again. So if a missile is fired at us from a SAM system for example, it might have say a 1 in 3 chance of hitting us. Since it might be going after one of the false return signatures generated from the ECM system. Also this idea extends to giving us more control of how to launch flares and chaff, since right now we burn through them way to fast because of the lack of control.

 

Also something i think should be done, though it's really a minor note. Is Missiles don't have a maximum range, max target speeds, nor many characteristics of ones in real life besides tracking and exploding. Thus If you have no counter measures you really are screwed, because you can't keep range nor can you use speed to keep distance from an incoming missile until it burns out. This i bring up because it will help the smart ground attack pilots, but it will also give the newer jets a better change against light AA since they lack a strong ground attack capability. Now this of course only really matters for light AA and AT infantry carry and most likely would be using in static set ups, since those are often limited in performance by the fact people gotta carry them.

 

Outside of features, i expect something like a (bluefor) F-35 and (opfor) PAK FA or J-31 and (indi) F-4 phantom, Mig-21, Mirage 2000, or Panavia Tonrado for the main multi-role fighters. And also wouldn't be surprised if we see a generation 6 aircraft (for the future theme), kinda hope if so it's a drone designed for air superiority. Also I expect some AA vehicles, most like dedicated SAM systems. But I hope we also get some AA and AT MRAP variants, because that is a realistic thing you see done to such a vehicles and would be nice to have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They said the F-35 won't make a return. I couldn't even speculate on what they'll add for NATO. As for Opfor, J-31 fits too perfectly, it looks pretty much like other Opfor themed vehicles and no one's made it. Although the J-20 seems cool, no one know's what role it's to fulfill. Indep may get the Gripen, as being it 2035, and BI previously having recorded the Gripen Engine, and the plane is in open procurement at a low price. Also BI's Roadmap mentioned cutting edge Air Superiority Fighters. Not quite sure an F-4 checks that box.  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't they meant the F35 that was shown before release? It could still mean that they make a new one for the DLC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They said the F-35 won't make a return. I couldn't even speculate on what they'll add for NATO. As for Opfor, J-31 fits too perfectly, it looks pretty much like other Opfor themed vehicles and no one's made it. Although the J-20 seems cool, no one know's what role it's to fulfill. Indep may get the Gripen, as being it 2035, and BI previously having recorded the Gripen Engine, and the plane is in open procurement at a low price. Also BI's Roadmap mentioned cutting edge Air Superiority Fighters. Not quite sure an F-4 checks that box.  ;)

 

Well i used those jets for the indi because they are all older aircraft but still used in service (thus in line with the buzzard) and all were used as air superiority aircraft at some point. So F-4 does fit just fine, though will admit the F-5 and Mirage 2000 would be the better choices of the  four i list for indi.

As for the F-35, if they aren't going to use that. Then bluefor i could see use the F-15 Silent Eagle, which would fit in line with NATO in game having a lesser budget thus upgrading a proven aircraft to a newer standard. Or maybe just a Eurotyphoon might be used, since britan a nato member and notable one in game uses them and they are newer aircraft thus could easily be used out to 2035.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of wish OPFOR got the PAK-FA or maybe MIG MFI. Except the "Chinese" VTOL (it still looks Russian to me), all CSAT aircraft are Russian-made. I don't know which direction they'll take the DLC, but I think its reasonable to expect another Russian jet. J-31 would be reasonable for the Chinese, but I think it looks too American ("Chinese counterfeit F-35" comes to mind). :) I expect the new fighter to look Russian-ish, even if it is stated to be Chinese.

 

For NATO, I don't know. F-22 is one choice, F-35 is another (but they said it won't be making a return). Maybe they'll go with a completely fictional design with F-18 and F-35 elements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Missions or scenarios are a waste imo. You play them once, maybe twice, but thats it. Showcase, ok, its usefull. But a chain of missions? nah. Lot of work for little effect. Thats why you dont see a campaign for every DLC in the first place. They should focus on gamemodes where these assetts can be properly utilized to their full extend. Which is what i hope tacops dlc will bring. They are replayable many times and can have multiple configurations for variation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that a showcase (and maybe a few time trails, I believe we'll get a couple of those for the jets) is enough, but it has to be a good showcase. The one for fixed wing flight is a good example of what they should be going for. A long mission with varying objectives and an interesting narrative can be just as good as a short campaign.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the idea of a jet DLC

 

My wishes:

If you are in command of planes you should be able to order them to fly in a certain height.

(in general it would be nice if you could use all the editor functionality for waypoints in command mode)

When in careless mode planes should only follow the flightpath and never engage. (especially important for gunships)

 

We need a working map for the MFD

 

A new damage model would be very nice!

In Arma you can eject and fight your way home unlike in all other flight simulators.

Now unfortunately the plane just blows up if you hit a sign at the side of the runway or if you are hit by a missile.

Would be much better if the engine and the electronics would cut out so you had time to get out before the plane explodes.

Some explosions when heavily damaged would still be OK  (same for helicopters)

Would be nice if planes would separate into fragments when exploding (at least make the wreck sink half ways into the ground)

 

Give us more options to zoom the view   in and out. An extreme wide angel can be practical for situational awareness.

 

I would like it if the default HUD at the top of the screen could be switched off. All the information should be visible in the real HUD or the instruments.

 

A good showcase mission or mini campaign would be nice.

It should feature a rescue mission if you should get shot down. (and only if) The enemy should be triggered to hunt you and your side should send a rescue mission to a predetermined location.

This would highlight some of Armas unique features.

 

Looking forward to it!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of wish OPFOR got the PAK-FA or maybe MIG MFI. Except the "Chinese" VTOL (it still looks Russian to me), all CSAT aircraft are Russian-made. I don't know which direction they'll take the DLC, but I think its reasonable to expect another Russian jet. J-31 would be reasonable for the Chinese, but I think it looks too American ("Chinese counterfeit F-35" comes to mind). :) I expect the new fighter to look Russian-ish, even if it is stated to be Chinese.

 

For NATO, I don't know. F-22 is one choice, F-35 is another (but they said it won't be making a return). Maybe they'll go with a completely fictional design with F-18 and F-35 elements.

My bets on the J-20. No other aircraft out there looks close to ithe right now, it's Chinese developed, and cutting edge. Very CSAT looking, especially with all its moving parts. Here's some short 4k footage of it. "https://youtu.be/pPsWiJlJsrQ"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I would like it if the default HUD at the top of the screen could be switched off. All the information should be visible in the real HUD or the instruments.

 

This, in my opinion, is very important. I could go on and on about how we need a total overhaul of how radar works and how countermeasures need to change and how missiles need to behave like real missiles, but I think one of the most important changes is making the cockpit actually work.

 

Ideally, we should never be seeing any of the game UI when flying the jets; all relevant flight information from airspeed/altitude, weapon info, sighting and targeting info, etc. should come 100% from the cockpits. Until this happens we'll never have decently realistic feeling aircraft in Arma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Randomized Flare system so flares don't just follow the same rout ever time they are deployed. Would make it look way more realistic.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This, in my opinion, is very important. I could go on and on about how we need a total overhaul of how radar works and how countermeasures need to change and how missiles need to behave like real missiles, but I think one of the most important changes is making the cockpit actually work.

 

Ideally, we should never be seeing any of the game UI when flying the jets; all relevant flight information from airspeed/altitude, weapon info, sighting and targeting info, etc. should come 100% from the cockpits. Until this happens we'll never have decently realistic feeling aircraft in Arma.

This is my sentiment in general, not only for jets, but also tanks, cars and infantry. It's sort-of possible in helicopters now, but due to the way FOV works in ArmA (or used to, they recently tweaked it and I didn't have a chance to try the latest tweaks out) analog gauges in helos are hard to see on my monitor. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Randomized Flare system so flares don't just follow the same rout ever time they are deployed. Would make it look way more realistic.

OR just enabling an already working system of Flare mode would work fine with minimal effort to create a new countermeasure system. AS will always use burst, but it'd be nice if we could actually use counter measures like they're intended. Speaking of which, I remember how amazing counter measures were in BF2. You have AA threat, and you have counter measures. Once you begun getting locked, you can deploy them. What this does is bring up locks on the flares for those using the AA. So now they're launcher is locking onto the flares, and not the aircraft due to the heat signature. Something like that would be great improvement to countermeasures.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Randomized Flare system so flares don't just follow the same rout ever time they are deployed. Would make it look way more realistic.

 Randomized how so? The flares seem pretty good to me visually, flares are usually deployed in predefined programs which would pop x flares at a regular interval (say, 0.25s). What we do need, however, is the ability to pop a single pair manually, and also for them to function correctly instead of whatever they do now to "spoof" missiles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×