Apex Vehicles Feedback

[dragon01 902]

Doesn't work, at least not when trying to bind it to a joystick. Autohover and vectoring have been separated in the last builds. I suppose they want to add autohover to VTOLs at some point, otherwise I don't see the point.

 

Hey BI, what about the railgun tank? Will China get the railgun tank? I'd totally dig to see a railgun tank. If you have magic stealth suits that make heat disappear, you can have not-magic railgun tanks too! 

 

By this point, I certainly wouldn't mind magnetic weapons being a thing. Maybe base the tank on the Russian Armata system (it's modular enough, could probably take at least a coilgun). TBH, besides the camo, CSAT gear generally looks more Russian than Chinese (their VTOL is almost certainly a Chinese knockoff of a Russian knockoff of a canned American VTOL originally meant for a certain anti-alien agency that got its funding cut for ignoring one UFO too many...  :) ).

[Belbo 461]

have you tried changing autohover button for helicopters? Because that's changeable and on x. It's just not featured in the plane controlls iirc.

Autohover and vectoring aren't bound to each other.

[Jnr4817 215]

How do you have your autohovering and vectoring setup?

 

I am using a thrustmaster HOTAS with autohover on joystick.

[five_seven5-7 56]

V-44 should have rotor blades damage for try to take off/landing with them in horizontal axis

[x3kj 1247]

How do you have your autohovering and vectoring setup?

 

I am using a thrustmaster HOTAS with autohover on joystick.

Yes i also bound autohover to a button on my joystick and it works perfectly fine with VTOL. There is no different "vectoring" controll. Autohover engages Vtol to 100% when enabled and that's the only choice you get. Either 100% hover or automatic-thrust-vector (in disabled autohover mode).

[fn_Quiksilver 1633]

Deleting vehicle in the back of the VTOL crashes the VTOL-local machine to desktop

 

repro:

 

player A gets into the VTOL as driver (takes simulation ownership).

 

player B (as Zeus or whatever) loads a vehicle into the VTOL

 

player B deletes the loaded vehicle

 

player A crashes to desktop

[PuFu 4591]

Deleting vehicle in the back of the VTOL crashes the VTOL-local machine to desktop

 

repro:

 

player A gets into the VTOL as driver (takes simulation ownership).

 

player B (as Zeus or whatever) loads a vehicle into the VTOL

 

player B deletes the loaded vehicle

 

player A crashes to desktop

check known issues: https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/140837-development-branch-changelog/?p=3045719

if you check the following changelogs, you'll see there is no mention of a fix for it

[nerdwing 13]

It is hard to say for me if it's actually that weak

the drone does not have to carry 8 people when maxed out which is ~ 800 kg

and there is no sling loading option

which means its engines can take a HUGE amount of armor

and you can notice the sound of reflection when firing light weapons into it

rotor blades should also be very durable by 2035

 

I agree totally.  IMO, it should be very small-arms resistant.  But HMG fire and greater should be a very serious threat still.    300 rounds is far too much.

[ivan keska 45]

the gunship blackfish really needs to have an automated lead system. So you can just put crosshair on target and know thr rounds will land pretty much where you are aiming. Because if you trying to target an area and put down accurate fire near friendlies you want to make sure your shot don't miss.

[fn_Quiksilver 1633]

CSAT (Pacific) soldiers still need to be issued the green hex rifle variants of the CTAR

[taro8 806]

the gunship blackfish really needs to have an automated lead system. So you can just put crosshair on target and know thr rounds will land pretty much where you are aiming. Because if you trying to target an area and put down accurate fire near friendlies you want to make sure your shot don't miss.

Perfectly possible to add this one as all it need is a simple addition to gun's config and adding the ability to lock on onto targets. That is why I suggested that the other gunnner to actually be fire coordinator with laser designator. This way he can lase targets and the gunner can lock onto laser target. Also the gun can have CCIP with shows where shells will actually land without need to lock on, best part is: you can have both systems on at the same time, I did that for my M2 Slammer Firepower Upgrade Project (check my signature).

 

Now, I would like to ask if it would be possible to make some additions to the new CSAT VTOL:

*when ramp is open and in hover mode the nozzles should be pointed away from the ramp because it would fry anyone trying to board or get out using it

*maybe add some kind of reverse thrust with would act like airbrakes or flaps and let AI use it to slow down, because it has HUGE issues trying to land this thing

*AI is derpy as fuck trying to use the VTOL, the new patch did improve the flying quite a bit (no more wobble), but good luck trying to order the VTOL to land or the  pilot disembark. When I tried ordering pilot to get out he flew all over the place, finally slowed down enough to attempt landing, did a rolling landing, jumped out the moment wheels hit the ground, killed himself, damaged the VTOL with really hard landing, injured everyone inside the VTOL

*I really want AI to fly the VTOL like a helicopter while in hover mode.

*could we get unarmed variant?

[dragon01 902]

the gunship blackfish really needs to have an automated lead system. So you can just put crosshair on target and know thr rounds will land pretty much where you are aiming. Because if you trying to target an area and put down accurate fire near friendlies you want to make sure your shot don't miss.

Yeah, the big advantage of fire support aircraft is that they can lay fire accurately. Currently it's very hard to do, if you aim using the crosshair, you have a good chance to end up hitting the friendlies, since the lead is usually just around the range of a typical rifle firefight...

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

CSAT (Pacific) soldiers still need to be issued the green hex rifle variants of the CTAR

This is vehicle thread, and i think you mean CAR-95 series.

[inafinus 7]

A majority of NATO vehicles and some CSAT vehicles are missing the new camo options.

 

CSAT vehicles without new camo:

 

• To-199 Neophron
• Po-30 Orca
• Mi-290 Taru

 

NATO vehicles without new camo:

 

• Basically everything except for the Ghost Hawk.

 

 

 

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

 

A majority of NATO vehicles and some CSAT vehicles are missing the new camo options.

 

CSAT vehicles without new camo:

 

• To-199 Neophron
• Po-30 Orca
• Mi-290 Taru

 

NATO vehicles without new camo:

 

• Basically everything except for the Ghost Hawk.

 

Kajman too.

[fn_Quiksilver 1633]

This is vehicle thread, and i think you mean CAR-95 series.

 

O_T_Soldier_F  is a vehicle under cfgvehicles ;)

[ivan keska 45]

Something I just remembered that existed and wish they used instead of the Osprey for the NATO gunship, is the OV-10. Because it is a small aircraft thats proven it's effectiveness in the past, and is being looked into once again for a reinvention. Plus it pretty much is a baby C-130 which who doesn't like the sound of that. Though realistically it wouldn't make sense to design or buy a new aircraft when you already have a proven design that can just be modified to do the same task. Then again a OV-10 modern could be made with stealth capabilities (full or semi) well also sporting a Semi-VTOL mode like the XI'AN that allows for a very slow flight speed.

 

Which by the way the XI'AN would not work as a full VTOL design, instead it would be a more of  STOL system. Because those fans would not be able to produce enough thrust to properly maintain flight without forward movement occurring thus the wings aiding by providing lift. Unless there are secondary engine nozzles that are assisting in lift, which are easy to miss like the ones on the F-35's wings. And if carrying a vehicle or other heavy stuff the thing would most likely not take over using VTOL or STOL, but would have to use a run way.

Also on a similar note regarding the blackfish, to anyone thats dealt with the Osprey in real life. Do you think the Blackfish would be able to successful land and take off vertically if carrying heavy cargo (Armored vehicles and such). Because I feel like it shouldn't be able to, but instead would have STOL capability or have to take off and land normally. Since it's really just a bigger Osprey that is most likely a bit heavier and also engines are most likely better, so performance would be safe to say would be pretty similar. And when you add in the fact vehicles like the MRAP's pretty much all weigh 20,000 pounds or more which would put an Osprey overweight for VTOL mode and possibly even it's true max take off weight. I think it's reasonable to say if the blackfish is carrying any of the armored vehicles it will most likely be over weight for VTOL, but if carrying one of the FAVs, normal cars, and/or supplies then most likely would not be over weight for VTOL.

[dragon01 902]

Actually, Xi'an uses its main engines in addition to lift fans. An odd arrangement (I'm not sure if that'd work well), but definitely possible. It probably has additional nozzles for control in VTOL mode. That should suffice for VTOL operation with an infantry squad loaded.

 

You're right about weight issues with vehicles on board, though. VTOLs are usually underpowered in vertical flight, so they should not be able to carry things like APCs and still be able to operate vertically. unarmed MRAPs, maybe (Blackfish is very big for a VTOL, so is the Xi'an), but just barely.

[tinter 184]

Something I just remembered that existed and wish they used instead of the Osprey for the NATO gunship, is the OV-10. Because it is a small aircraft thats proven it's effectiveness in the past, and is being looked into once again for a reinvention. Plus it pretty much is a baby C-130 which who doesn't like the sound of that. Though realistically it wouldn't make sense to design or buy a new aircraft when you already have a proven design that can just be modified to do the same task. Then again a OV-10 modern could be made with stealth capabilities (full or semi) well also sporting a Semi-VTOL mode like the XI'AN that allows for a very slow flight speed.

 

Which by the way the XI'AN would not work as a full VTOL design, instead it would be a more of  STOL system. Because those fans would not be able to produce enough thrust to properly maintain flight without forward movement occurring thus the wings aiding by providing lift. Unless there are secondary engine nozzles that are assisting in lift, which are easy to miss like the ones on the F-35's wings. And if carrying a vehicle or other heavy stuff the thing would most likely not take over using VTOL or STOL, but would have to use a run way.

Also on a similar note regarding the blackfish, to anyone thats dealt with the Osprey in real life. Do you think the Blackfish would be able to successful land and take off vertically if carrying heavy cargo (Armored vehicles and such). Because I feel like it shouldn't be able to, but instead would have STOL capability or have to take off and land normally. Since it's really just a bigger Osprey that is most likely a bit heavier and also engines are most likely better, so performance would be safe to say would be pretty similar. And when you add in the fact vehicles like the MRAP's pretty much all weigh 20,000 pounds or more which would put an Osprey overweight for VTOL mode and possibly even it's true max take off weight. I think it's reasonable to say if the blackfish is carrying any of the armored vehicles it will most likely be over weight for VTOL, but if carrying one of the FAVs, normal cars, and/or supplies then most likely would not be over weight for VTOL.

Regardless of what the real life characteristics of VTOL are, it would most likely be out of scope for Arma to implement something like that.

[VTOLAFMPLS:3 36]

Y-32 missing black paint apparently

[MG93xsf 9]

I feel like the Caesar BTT should have a float plane variant maybe even an amphibious one like the cessna mod on armaholic. Seeing as Tanoa is very water based it would fit.

[Jnr4817 215]

Agreed

I feel like the Caesar BTT should have a float plane variant maybe even an amphibious one like the cessna mod on armaholic. Seeing as Tanoa is very water based it would fit.

[Kydoimos 915]

Seems the NATO prowler is clipping with the ground - wheels are always just below the surface - not by much, only about a couple of inches.

[probad 44]

i'm disappointed that csat ground units get recolors for tanoa but not nato.

[bek 744]

i'm disappointed that csat ground units get recolors for tanoa but not nato.

 

They're still working on Apex; since such retextures are more time-consuming than they are difficult it seems likely they're slowly working through vanilla A3 content, and happened to work on csat first. I would be surprised if they weren't all completed by the final release.