Apex Vehicles Feedback

[Wiki 1558]

Double click the loiter way point to open attributes. There you can choose which way it should circle, loiter hight and radius.

 

 

-Turn vectoring off, this will stop the tilt props from rotating angle. Just like you turn auto hover on and off

-The loiter waypoint for the Blackish is somewhat broken atm

 

Thanks guys

[kecske 46]

http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/266093765296491625/9C3416BD4E49533416E3A279427539B99EA52A34/

Motorboats components are messed up by default
(police and rescue lacks siren and signs on the side, while civilian shouldnt have either of those)

[GuyWithaJeep 82]

They may not look right in the editor, but they will be correct once you are playing as a unit or otherwise running the game.

 

http://i.imgur.com/OR0O74J.png

[x3kj 1247]

Could somebody tell the Blackfish Pilots that they are no fighterbombers?

If you give them a move order, and an AA gun locks them up, they pop flares and make a turn towards the AA to "engage" it. Not just the armed version, also the transports. BANZAIII

 

In addition, the transport blackfish's spawn with 1 pilots and 3copilots by default, which is silly. They should have only 1 copilot. It's not THAT large of a plane to require 3 copilots.

[xxgetbuck123 945]

Could somebody tell the Blackfish Pilots that they are no fighterbombers?

If you give them a move order, and an AA gun locks them up, they pop flares and make a turn towards the AA to "engage" it. Not just the armed version, also the transports. BANZAIII

 

In addition, the transport blackfish's spawn with 1 pilots and 3copilots by default, which is silly. They should have only 1 copilot. It's not THAT large of a plane to require 3 copilots.

 

Considering its the same size as a C130 (if you overlay them) and the C130 has 3-4 crew, 2 pilots and 2 overseer kinda guys (I'm no expert on C130s), so it is reasonable. 

[x3kj 1247]

Considering its the same size as a C130 (if you overlay them) and the C130 has 3-4 crew, 2 pilots and 2 overseer kinda guys (I'm no expert on C130s), so it is reasonable. 

maybe in RL, but not ingame. What's the purpose of these 2 additional crew? to look out of the window, that's all. They can't even take controll of the aircraft. There is a reason why we do not have had loaders in tanks since OFP. Useless positions are best left as passengerpositions and uncrewed by AI by default to cut down on unnecessary AI units on servers.

[dragon01 902]

Well, the A2's Abrams had the loader, or at least the TUSK version did. I don't remember about T-34, but IIRC it also had more than 3 crew. All the other tanks in the series had autoloaders, so no need for the 4th position (well, Merkava didn't, but it's possible they fitted it with one for the Slammer variant).

 

That said, I think that it'd be good if those crew positions actually did something, as opposed to just sitting around. Currently the additional copilots are useless, like the loadmaster on Taru. At the very least, they should be able to look into the cargobay with a PIP display (that's the point of having a loadmaster...) and be able to take controls.

[VTOLAFMPLS:3 36]

Blackfish pilots spawn with fighter jet helmets

 

 

they won't be using this model itf

[x3kj 1247]

Well, the A2's Abrams had the loader, or at least the TUSK version did. I don't remember about T-34, but IIRC it also had more than 3 crew. All the other tanks in the series had autoloaders, so no need for the 4th position (well, Merkava didn't, but it's possible they fitted it with one for the Slammer variant).

 

That said, I think that it'd be good if those crew positions actually did something, as opposed to just sitting around. Currently the additional copilots are useless, like the loadmaster on Taru. At the very least, they should be able to look into the cargobay with a PIP display (that's the point of having a loadmaster...) and be able to take controls.

tusk only has a loader because that one has a MG in the loader position, and t34 has only the bow mg gunner (not the loader). T55 has no autoloader and no loader position. M1A2 base version had no loader position implemented. Leopard 2 "revolution" and Merkava 4 have no autoloader either and dont have a loader position implemented. Know your facts. If the position has gameplay it's included. Otherwise they are left out or only implemented as passenger seat with no default AI crew. Therefore i see no reason why the blackfish should be an exception all of a sudden.

A copilot is usefull, because he can take over controll when the pilot is dead. 2 extra "sight seeing tourists" AI in the cockpit are not usefull.

[dragon01 902]

Right, forgot about T-55. It's been a while since I played A2, so I don't remember all the details like that. As for Leopard 2 and Merkava, one could very well say that they had autoloaders fitted in the version they appear in. A3 vehicles had less likely changes done to them (Marksman turret on a BTR-K chassis, for instance).

 

Blackfish isn't completely unprecedented. Taru has the "loadmaster" position, which doesn't seem to do anything useful, either. I think that rather than removing those positions, BI should find some use for them. 

[xxgetbuck123 945]

Right, forgot about T-55. It's been a while since I played A2, so I don't remember all the details like that. As for Leopard 2 and Merkava, one could very well say that they had autoloaders fitted in the version they appear in. A3 vehicles had less likely changes done to them (Marksman turret on a BTR-K chassis, for instance).

 

Blackfish isn't completely unprecedented. Taru has the "loadmaster" position, which doesn't seem to do anything useful, either. I think that rather than removing those positions, BI should find some use for them. 

 

Maybe put another 2x flir pods on the Blackfish somewhere so you now have 3x flir pods haha 

[dragon01 902]

I just found another Blackfish bug. When I got it to loiter properly over an enemy position (waypoint AI behavior set to "careless" to keep it from acting like a gunship), only the "right gunner" position actually fired (quite accurately at first, but it degraded after the first circle). Left gunner, who manages the 20mm and the cannon, didn't do anything. This strongly limits the VTOL's effectiveness when used as an AI plane.

[x3kj 1247]

Right, forgot about T-55. It's been a while since I played A2, so I don't remember all the details like that. As for Leopard 2 and Merkava, one could very well say that they had autoloaders fitted in the version they appear in. A3 vehicles had less likely changes done to them (Marksman turret on a BTR-K chassis, for instance).

 

Blackfish isn't completely unprecedented. Taru has the "loadmaster" position, which doesn't seem to do anything useful, either. I think that rather than removing those positions, BI should find some use for them. 

it's not about removing those positions, it's about not spawning AI in it in the editor/zeus/ whatever

[twistking 204]

the armed qilin lsv has some serious sound mixing issues with the minigun when being fired from first person view.

 

it seems a bit as if only the sound of the hydraulics and mechanical rattling are being played but not the sound of the actual "firing". in third person view each shot has that loud, aggressive bang, but in first person it is absent.

 

 

*edit*: ps: stable branch

[mickeymen 322]

Hi all. Yesterday, I have some tests with new vehicles V-44 X Blackfish VTOL and Y-32 Xi'an VTOL.

Yes, this unique vehicles for Arma, but as seemed to me, work is only 70% had finished with them.

Many flaws hinder enjoy them to the fullest.

 

List of some issues:

1. These vehicles do not have Advanced Flight Model, on the background of all helicopters in the game, it looks poorly.

2. These vehicles do not have normal damage model. No damage to the right/left engine, for fuel tank, for weapons. This damage model has only - HULL. Again, on the background of all helicopters, it looks poorly.

3. The many tests shown me, that there is no visual damage effects for the front wind glass. In the game, it undestructable!?

This detail spoils any simulation for the pilot. And again - not good damage model.

4. The rotation of the propeller for the V-44 X Blackfish VTOL shown bad. No quality and smooth animation.

5. The surface of the Y-32 Xi'an VTOL, looks too shiny and mirror. It's not like military armor.

6. There is no animation for loading for Qilin LSV into cargo, the ramp will not open.This new action in the Arma is overly arcade. BIS, you could create an animation as light vehicle calls in the inside via opened ramp. (without the participation of the player)

7. During unloading of troops from V-44 X Blackfish VTOL and Y-32 Xi'an VTOL, the ramp does not open. Soldiers are jump through the closed ramp. It looks also not good. This problem also was formerly with the all helicopters, which have a ramp. I still do not understand why we can not have everything well, so that the ramp opened.

 

If BIS will fix these items, then it will be much better :D 

 

 

[dragon01 902]

The first issues are somewhat fundamental problems. The Blackfish isn't a helicopter, but an airplane, as far as the game is concerned. This is why it has all these problems. All planes, including the UAVs, have them.

 

As for the ramps, well, there's another whole thread about them. :) Yes, they would be nice, but there are problems with the ramps, to say the least.

[xxgetbuck123 945]

 

Hi all. Yesterday, I have some tests with new vehicles V-44 X Blackfish VTOL and Y-32 Xi'an VTOL.

Yes, this unique vehicles for Arma, but as seemed to me, work is only 70% had finished with them.

Many flaws hinder enjoy them to the fullest.

 

List of some issues:

1. These vehicles do not have Advanced Flight Model, on the background of all helicopters in the game, it looks poorly.

2. These vehicles do not have normal damage model. No damage to the right/left engine, for fuel tank, for weapons. This damage model has only - HULL. Again, on the background of all helicopters, it looks poorly.

3. The many tests shown me, that there is no visual damage effects for the front wind glass. In the game, it undestructable!?

This detail spoils any simulation for the pilot. And again - not good damage model.

4. The rotation of the propeller for the V-44 X Blackfish VTOL shown bad. No quality and smooth animation.

5. The surface of the Y-32 Xi'an VTOL, looks too shiny and mirror. It's not like military armor.

6. There is no animation for loading for Qilin LSV into cargo, the ramp will not open.This new action in the Arma is overly arcade. BIS, you could create an animation as light vehicle calls in the inside via opened ramp. (without the participation of the player)

7. During unloading of troops from V-44 X Blackfish VTOL and Y-32 Xi'an VTOL, the ramp does not open. Soldiers are jump through the closed ramp. It looks also not good. This problem also was formerly with the all helicopters, which have a ramp. I still do not understand why we can not have everything well, so that the ramp opened.

 

If BIS will fix these items, then it will be much better :D 

 

 

1.That's cause the VTOL is classed as a plane

2.That's cause the VTOL is classed as a plane

3.That's cause the VTOL is classed as a plane

4.Need proof of what you're talking about

5.Agree

6.BI said its not going to happen

7.Manually open the ramp and you wont have that problem

[mickeymen 322]

That's cause the VTOL is classed as a plane

 

As seems to me, it does not justify this omission. The all aircraft in the game must have an Advanced flight model and modular damage model. At least, it looks logical. 

[dragon01 902]

You should realize just how different the flight models are. Helicopter AFM is done by an external, commercial library named rotorwinglib. This is a set of features that BI originally introduced in Take On: Helicopters, later adding that capability to ArmA3. These libraries are quite expensive to license, too. Still, it allowed BIS to implement a realistic flight model for helicopters, which would otherwise be impossible for them to do in a reasonable time. 

 

Airplanes have no such thing, rotorwinglib is not suited for handling fixed-wing aircraft. Thus, the airplane simulation is pretty much the same as it was in ArmA2 (slightly tweaked, but still). This flight model sort-of works, but is rather rudimentary. There is an equivalent package, called fixedwinglib, which could be used to add something like AFM to airplanes. I think BI should do it someday, but it'd be a huge amount of work to implement, just like rotorwinglib was, as well as a rather large investment. I don't know if you were around since then, but rotorwinglib was originally supposed to be in ArmA3 from the start, but had to be postponed until the "helicopters" DLC, which probably also helped them to reimburse that investment. 

 

If BIS announces "airplanes" DLC, then there's a good chance VTOLs will get AFM then. fixedwinglib can handle such cases. However, it'd take a lot of work and plenty of money, too. Right now, they're way too busy trying to wrap up Apex and get the updated medical system into shape.

[ivan keska 45]

so um... we ever going to to get a pacific coloration for the nato vehicles. Because we should have had a khaki or green coloration of these vehicles by now. Since i doubt it would take you guys more then 2 hours to just change the base color of tan to a khaki or a green, for all the nato vehicles. Because nato even defunded would rather spend a bit of money to repaint their vehicles, over having them stand out so much. Thus risking the crew or worse the vehicle.

[mickeymen 322]

You should realize just how different the flight models are. Helicopter AFM is done by an external, commercial library named rotorwinglib. This is a set of features that BI originally introduced in Take On: Helicopters, later adding that capability to ArmA3. These libraries are quite expensive to license, too. Still, it allowed BIS to implement a realistic flight model for helicopters, which would otherwise be impossible for them to do in a reasonable time. 

 

Airplanes have no such thing, rotorwinglib is not suited for handling fixed-wing aircraft. Thus, the airplane simulation is pretty much the same as it was in ArmA2 (slightly tweaked, but still). This flight model sort-of works, but is rather rudimentary. There is an equivalent package, called fixedwinglib, which could be used to add something like AFM to airplanes. I think BI should do it someday, but it'd be a huge amount of work to implement, just like rotorwinglib was, as well as a rather large investment. I don't know if you were around since then, but rotorwinglib was originally supposed to be in ArmA3 from the start, but had to be postponed until the "helicopters" DLC, which probably also helped them to reimburse that investment. 

 

If BIS announces "airplanes" DLC, then there's a good chance VTOLs will get AFM then. fixedwinglib can handle such cases. However, it'd take a lot of work and plenty of money, too. Right now, they're way too busy trying to wrap up Apex and get the updated medical system into shape.

 

Thanks for the information, but as seems to me, that the V-44 X Blackfish VTOL and Y-32 Xi'an VTOL not require flight as the plane model.

It should initially adapted to - rotorwinglib, because they're more like a helicopter, than a planes and, most importantly - because they have a vertical take-off.

[xxgetbuck123 945]

Thanks for the information, but as seems to me, that the V-44 X Blackfish VTOL and Y-32 Xi'an VTOL not require flight as the plane model.

It should initially adapted to - rotorwinglib, because they're more like a helicopter, than a planes and, most importantly - because they have a vertical take-off.

 

I understand what you're saying, but by that logic Harriers should be classed a Helicopter then cause that can go VTOL? Or the F35B is a helicopter due to VTOL. 

[Grumpy Old Man 3540]

A more general question about the new tanoa vehicles,

why did NATO and CSAT receive the Prowler and Quilin from their pacific factions, yet the drones and vtols remain exclusive to the pacific faction?

 

Cheers

[xxgetbuck123 945]

Some V44 Blackfish feedback based on a Milsim op we just did using the Blackfish variants. 

 

-[ARMED] Being able to see the location of the gunners gun position (Like you can in land vehicles), would greatly enhance teamwork, communications and guided the gunners on target. 

-[ARMED] Possible addition of auto leading as if someone wants danger close CAS or general close CAS you've got to get real close to minimise unwanted spray.  

-[CARGO] Co-Pilot in the cargo variant being able the eject the cargo, so the pilot can focus on flying the right line while the co-pilot drops the goods. 

-[ALL] Co-Pilot flir pod being able to laze and also display a little more information such heading, distance, grid etc.

[dragon01 902]

The "Armed" Blackfish needs quite a few improvements in general to be usable. Automatic lead correction (or at least a lead indicator like on the AA guns), better gun stabilization (UAV-style) and perhaps an option for one gunner to control all the weapons. Right now, it seems to neither work well with AI (two guns don't fire) or with player control (hard to get good accuracy).

Thanks for the information, but as seems to me, that the V-44 X Blackfish VTOL and Y-32 Xi'an VTOL not require flight as the plane model.

It should initially adapted to - rotorwinglib, because they're more like a helicopter, than a planes and, most importantly - because they have a vertical take-off.

They would have done it if it was possible. Unfortunately, it seems that it isn't. You can't just switch flight models in flight. VTOLs are not more like a helicopter and a library created specifically to use with helicopters will not function properly in their case (they would be only able to fly with their rotors vertical). fixedwinglib is the one that explicitly supports VTOLs. This is probably because of assumptions made by each library. Basically, it seems to me that rotorwinglib assumes that your flying machine has the general form of a standard, 2-rotor helicoper with only aerodynamic surfaces being stabilizers (I don't know how well it handles pylons and winglets on some helos, but it probably doesn't, or does so in a rudimentary way). Not to mention the Xi'an uses ducted fans, which don't behave like rotors at all.