jets JETS DLC Wishlist

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

1 hour ago, sasha013 said:

 

Sorry, I did word it wrong. Wiki pretty much cleared what I meant to ask. 

 

Wouldn't a static, fixed 'unmovable' carrier be better in regards to clipping issues? 

 Just make it a simple object in Eden.

[sasha013 225]

Well I just purchased the DLC Bundle and I'm looking forward to it... regardless of the outcome! :)

[sasha013 225]

@R0adki11

 

Seems my wish for a Gerald R Ford Carrier has come true after all 

[nodunit 397]

4 hours ago, sasha013 said:

@R0adki11

 

Seems my wish for a Gerald R Ford Carrier has come true after all 

Happy post/early birthday!

[teabagginpeople 398]

7 hours ago, nodunit said:

Happy post/early birthday!

Splendid joint effort BO1. The dlc is shaping up nicely.

[dimin69 3]

idk if sombody else said it but, i would love if we could eddit the loadout's of the jest in the virtual garage. tbh i don't get it why we are not able to that atm.

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

1 minute ago, Bohemias DLC are broken and OP said:

My only wish is for it to not be broken and overpowered like Marksmen and Apex were.

 

But, yeah, I know that isnt going to happen.

> OP

Unless the jets have 120 mm gatling cannons, which they don't obviously, they aren't OP. Balance isn't, or at least shouldn't be a thing in this game.

[Gilatar 272]

1 minute ago, Nightmare515 said:

> OP

Unless the jets have 120 mm gatling cannons, which they don't obviously, they aren't OP. Balance isn't, or at least shouldn't be a thing in this game.

 

I agree that balance shouldn't inherently be present in the game design. Balancing should solely be a responsibility of mission makers. ArmA is a military sandbox after all.

[nikiforos 450]

 I think that the external plane view is too zoomed in , too close to the aircraft and I would rather prefer to have a an external view from longer distance. Some mods already have that view implemented.

[peegee 118]

2 hours ago, Nightmare515 said:

> OP

Unless the jets have 120 mm gatling cannons, which they don't obviously, they aren't OP. Balance isn't, or at least shouldn't be a thing in this game.

Balancing has always been up to the mission maker :)
But I did already mentioned to him in his moan thread that vanilla Neophron literally can turn the new jets to shreds. At least with AI enemies.

E:  I haven't really won against tracked AA's. Jets natural enemy and all that stuff.

[McQuade 10]

I will miss that:

 

 

[WastedMike_ 27]

Will theses Jets be able to create a sonic boom? I am currently in the dev branch and I haven't noticed it yet. Also, I noticed I can't engage targets beyond visual range, why is that?

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

No boom, but the speed of sound feature is there. You won't hear the jet going mach 1 until it passes you.

[sasha013 225]

28 minutes ago, darksidesixofficial said:

No boom, but the speed of sound feature is there. You won't hear the jet going mach 1 until it passes you.

 

If a sonic boom is not included in the vanilla package, I'll bet money someone will create an audio mod that will add it in. 

[pipyn1970 19]

So disappointed with what ive seen so far from this DLC. Why oh why cant they give us proper working MFD's in the cockpits? Why MUST they give us radars that are on the screen instead of putting them in the cockpits where there is an image for them? Is it to much to ask for? I think it would of been nice for the MFD's to have pages for NAV, CCIP & the instruments for the AFM.

Even though I love the wasp & the UAV, it kinda annoys me that BIS thinks America IS NATO. Like the F35 was sold to other NATO nations, why cant the NATO vehicles have a different skin for each NATO country?

Regarding the Carrier. Wow I'm looking forward to that, however I wish they would add a little bit of a carrier strike force so the carrier don't look out of place all by her self. I also wished the wasp & UAV was like the F35b.

[drebin052 323]

15 hours ago, pipyn1970 said:

it kinda annoys me that BIS thinks America IS NATO. Like the F35 was sold to other NATO nations, why cant the NATO vehicles have a different skin for each NATO country?

 

Lore-wise in the Armaverse, Western European NATO members are in no position economically to assist in foreign operations hence why there are only U.S. forces.

 

It would therefore make little sense to have different textures for each European country given that there are no European units to use them to begin with, and that the F/A-181 is a carrier fighter and none of those European NATO members would have a carrier to launch them from in the first place.

[xxgetbuck123 945]

On 18/04/2017 at 9:18 PM, sasha013 said:

 

If a sonic boom is not included in the vanilla package, I'll bet money someone will create an audio mod that will add it in. 

 

Theres already a few of them around. Quite easy to implement :P 

[pipyn1970 19]

On ‎4‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 6:21 AM, drebin052 said:

Lore-wise in the Armaverse, Western European NATO members are in no position economically to assist in foreign operations hence why there are only U.S. forces.

 

It would therefore make little sense to have different textures for each European country given that there are no European units to use them to begin with, and that the F/A-181 is a carrier fighter and none of those European NATO members would have a carrier to launch them from in the first place.

The point I was trying to say was that the year is meant to be 2030 & by then even the UK would have 2 carriers in service. The 1st one (HMS Queen Elizabeth) will be deployed in 2020 I think I read. She will be a STOVL carrier. So in my opinion & wishes it would of been nice if the "Wasp" could of had an STOVL variant also. Just like the F35 family. Now it would be amazing if BIS brought out a "SEA" DLC that would give us a STOVL carrier(not draped with the USS name) (280 metres) & concentrated on both types of carriers with support ships so the lone carrier didn't look out of place. All the other ships (supply ship & frigate) would be unplayable & automated is self defence. The UK carrier will also be replacing HMS Ocean I'm told so the Marines would operate from there also!

But going back to the planes. As BIS has opted to go for the F22/18 (wasp) instead of the F35 family (this is Arma after all) & as the UK has bought the F35B for their carrier, then why cant there be a STOVL variant also? Please don't get me wrong about the wasp. From what ive seen, I think its a great model. But, I wish little things like the radars should of been placed within an MFD that the player turns on instead of floating outside as part of the UI.

[chortles 263]

On 4/18/2017 at 9:43 AM, pipyn1970 said:

Why oh why cant they give us proper working MFD's in the cockpits? Why MUST they give us radars that are on the screen instead of putting them in the cockpits where there is an image for them? Is it to much to ask for? I think it would of been nice for the MFD's to have pages for NAV, CCIP & the instruments for the AFM.

"Nice" can be "too much to ask for" when developing on a deadline... that and I like how the panels system seems to be entirely config-based, which is great for implementing these screens onto no-longer-updated community-made vehicles (read: config mod of the original vehicle without requiring access to the original unbinarized models).

[Maio 293]

 

 

For the sake of unity... and whatever passes up as order.. I swear to god ever since I left this pla... ahem... not their fault... they be but mere children.. waiting for the guiding hand that is I. Speaking of I, I shall close this thread. Nothing wrong with expressing wishes, but since the DLC is out in mid May and they have a code lock... hehe.. you folks figure out the rest.