Jets DLC Official Feedback

[WurschtBanane 11]

On 12.4.2018 at 1:54 PM, Imperator[TFD] said:

 

Do what I suggested in the editor and you will see you are wrong. :)

 

Edit:

Here I did it for you

 

 

 

 

The thing you seem to forget, is that in an ACTUAL scenario, where there is an enemy player in a jet, you wont be able to just shoot him in the weak spots like that and aim perfectly... you will be lucky to score some hits. Go on a King of the Hill server, get in the Shikra and try to kill an enemy Jet with just the cannon.

 

And then come back and accuse me of being bad.

 

 

EDIT: The main point is, that you should be able to destroy an enemy jet with ten 30mm rounds no matter where you hit it. And that would be the case if the ammo was high explosive. If you do not want the cannons abused for CAS runs, keep them AP, but at least give them more power, so that a few hits will render the enemy jet fully uncontrollable.

[Beagle 684]

On 4/12/2018 at 3:13 PM, drgreenthumb said:

No I only use RHS. The flightmodel update seems pretty unnecessary, your wheels hit the rocks at the end of the runway and you blow up instantly. What are we supposed to fly from the shorter airstrips now, Cessnas? 

 

EDIT: It seems that JSRS is what caused the bombs not to show up in your weapon selection. I've left a message on their workshop page. 

 

Also I've removed some rocks at the end of the runway and the A164 can now take off but just barely. 

The dirst strips are indeed for small GA aircraft and Helicopters. It was always a bit wacky in ArmA III to allow to operate jet aircraft from there by having ridiculous short takeoff capabilities. Yes, you need an paved and prepared runway of at least 700 meters for Figter Jets. The shorter Dirststrips are also absolutely suitable for VTOL use.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

8 hours ago, WurschtBanane said:

 

 

The thing you seem to forget, is that in an ACTUAL scenario, where there is an enemy player in a jet, you wont be able to just shoot him in the weak spots like that and aim perfectly... you will be lucky to score some hits. Go on a King of the Hill server, get in the Shikra and try to kill an enemy Jet with just the cannon.

 

And then come back and accuse me of being bad.

 

 

EDIT: The main point is, that you should be able to destroy an enemy jet with ten 30mm rounds no matter where you hit it. And that would be the case if the ammo was high explosive. If you do not want the cannons abused for CAS runs, keep them AP, but at least give them more power, so that a few hits will render the enemy jet fully uncontrollable.

 

Irrespective of whether the damage is being dealt on the ground or in the air the fact remains the bullets do the same amount of damage.  I wasn't even aiming for 'weak spots' like you suggest, I simply place the jets down and shot them.

 

The cannons are fine.  Destroying a jet in <10 rounds would nullify the point of having components that can be damaged and we'll just go back to the days of planes either being alive or dead.

[WurschtBanane 11]

I am not talking about destroying the jets with 10+ rounds. The problem is that light AP ammo means the bullet only penetrates the component it actually hits. So if i hit the right wing 100 times, it will not even make the jet unflyable, it will just spin for a while. You hit the main part 20 times, something that will require you to waste all your ammunition against a dodging enemy player (if you even manage to stay behind him without him being helped or luring you over AA). And i know what i am talking about, i have spent dozens of hours fighting enemy player controlled Jets with the cannon.

 

But high explosive ammo would deal damage to MULTIPLE components when it hits, meaning 10 hits (no matter where they hit) wont blow up the jet, but disable the vertical controls and instruments, for example.

 

Another solution would be to give the bullets a way bigger punch, like the Su-25s (Yes i know it is not meant for CAP but public PvP is public PVP) Armor Piercing cannon in the RHS mod (of which i am too lazy to provide footage of right now), which disables any part of a jet in 1-2 hits, and also has big tracers when shooting and big effects when hitting, showing you where your bullets go, while the vanilla (new Jets, old ones work fine) bullets are almost invisible.

 

What aircraft cannon designer would think: Hey, lets give the aircraft light AP Ammo, which can only destroy a jet when hitting certain parts of it!

The fact that the new Jets dont get HE just looks like a balancing measure to me, which only works when fighting AI, despite the fact that the Jets DLC is meant to make things more realistic.

[a_killer_wombat 120]

Hang on, what's this talk about the jets using AP ammo? I thought all the air superiority fighters use HE ammo (even though there is no visible explosion effect for some reason). I tested the Black Wasp's 20mm cannon in editor and found that the rounds do indeed cause splash damage although with a relatively small radius.

[WurschtBanane 11]

7 hours ago, a_killer_wombat said:

Hang on, what's this talk about the jets using AP ammo? I thought all the air superiority fighters use HE ammo (even though there is no visible explosion effect for some reason). I tested the Black Wasp's 20mm cannon in editor and found that the rounds do indeed cause splash damage although with a relatively small radius.

 

Nope. AP and also a very light variant, you wont be blowing up any tanks or APCs with it.

[anthony45 3]

please  you can add b-52  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-52_Stratofortress? thanks you

[Wiki 1558]

11 hours ago, anthony45 said:

please  you can add b-52  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-52_Stratofortress? thanks you

 

1. Read the rules
2. This is not the addon request topic
3. This is Jet DLC feedback thread

[Ignatiux 0]

In the fighters, neither in the jets or in the CAS's plans I have an indicator of where I must shoot to hit an enemy vehicle in motion (continously computed impact point). I've tried CAS (otan, csat, aaf) and the jets.

PD: I do not have the DLC of jets or tanks purchased.
PD2: Mods: RHS, CUP, CBA

[HaseDesTodes 62]

18 minutes ago, Ignatiux said:

In the fighters, neither in the jets or in the CAS's plans I have an indicator of where I must shoot to hit an enemy vehicle in motion (continously computed impact point). I've tried CAS (otan, csat, aaf) and the jets.

 

CCIP = continuously computed IMPACT point

so CCIP doesn't show you where to aim, in order to hit. it does show you where you will hit when you shoot.

and all vanilla and DLC jets have that, at least for the cannon, not sure about rockets.

it should be in both vehicle hud and targeting camera.

[Ignatiux 0]

9 hours ago, HaseDesTodes said:

 

CCIP = punto de IMPACTO continuamente calculado

entonces CCIP no te muestra hacia donde apuntar, para poder golpear. te muestra dónde golpearás cuando disparas.

y todos los jets de vainilla y DLC tienen eso, al menos para el cañón, sin estar seguros de los cohetes.

debe estar tanto en el vehículo como en la cámara de orientación.

 

 

I mean this that you see in the video. It tells you where to shoot to hit the target you have set. I saw this in the showcase of jets, at a friend's house when the DLP came out. In my game I do not get such an indicator, I think I saw it in the a313 bUZZARD. But in f18 in combat against another fighter I do not have such an indicator.

PD: Attached video where it is seen, that for example, the a146 has the indicator that commented on the hud. The post for the video to begin where the attack to a terrestrial target is shown.
PD2: MODS that I use: CBA, RHS, CUP

 

 

[a_killer_wombat 120]

46 minutes ago, Ignatiux said:

I mean this that you see in the video. It tells you where to shoot to hit the target you have set. I saw this in the showcase of jets, at a friend's house when the DLP came out. In my game I do not get such an indicator, I think I saw it in the a313 bUZZARD. But in f18 in combat against another fighter I do not have such an indicator.

PD: Attached video where it is seen, that for example, the a146 has the indicator that commented on the hud. The post for the video to begin where the attack to a terrestrial target is shown.
PD2: MODS that I use: CBA, RHS, CUP

 

 

 

You no longer get that target lead indicator for ground vehicle targets, that behaviour has been removed via one of the main stable branch patches awhile ago. Now you still have a CCIP indicator which accounts for range but you have to manually lead moving ground targets yourself.

 

You only get a target lead indicator for air targets and only certain vehicles provide this functionality in the first place. I believe the Wipeout and Neophron attack jets don't provide this functionality while the air superiority/multi-role jets and SPAAGs do.

[Hvymtal 1251]

thing to note about CCIP though is that it is definitely not infallible, it simply puts the ordnance about on target, not on the 1x1m circle I was aiming at. This is more pronounced when trying to hit point targets with rockets or bombs.

[Ignatiux 0]

5 hours ago, a_killer_wombat said:

 

Ya no obtienes ese indicador de objetivo principal para los objetivos del vehículo terrestre, ese comportamiento se ha eliminado a través de uno de los parches principales estables hace un rato. Ahora todavía tienes un indicador CCIP que da cuenta del alcance, pero tienes que liderar manualmente los objetivos en movimiento.

 

Solo obtiene un indicador de objetivo para objetivos aéreos y solo ciertos vehículos proporcionan esta funcionalidad en primer lugar. Creo que los jets de ataque Wiopeout y Neophron no proporcionan esta funcionalidad mientras que los jets de superioridad aérea / multi-función y los SPAAG sí lo hacen.

Oh, I thought that only the indicator would come out if you had bought the dlc jets or that it was some error by dlc. In the jets of aerial superiority I do not obtain this mark when I fight against other jets of aerial superiority. Do you know if ACE adds such an indicator?

[a_killer_wombat 120]

16 hours ago, Ignatiux said:

Oh, I thought that only the indicator would come out if you had bought the dlc jets or that it was some error by dlc. In the jets of aerial superiority I do not obtain this mark when I fight against other jets of aerial superiority. Do you know if ACE adds such an indicator?

 

To get the target lead indicator you need to:

• Pilot an aircraft/vehicle which is equipped with that functionality (Wipeout, Neophron aren't equiped).
• Have your cannon selected ("F" to cycle through available weapons).
• Have an aircraft selected as your current target ("T" to target at centre of screen or "R" key to cycle through potential targets picked-up by sensors. You should see white brackets around the target).

 

You don't need any mods or DLC to use this functionality. Vanilla vehicles such as Buzzard, Cheetah/Tigris and Blackfoot/Kajman are equiped with this functionality by default.

 

[pr9inichek 133]

@saul @nodunit

 

Please check this issue - https://feedback.bistudio.com/T126600

 

 

[Mr. Rad 27]

Will BO1 studio consider developing a module based rearm and repair station that would allow pilots to choose their aircraft loadout on the fly while the mission maker can set up these stations on airfields and USS Freedom and choose which services and weapons are available. The loadout functionality added with Jets DLC is awesome but it would be even better if those could be chosen on the fly instead of before the mission.

[pr9inichek 133]

@saul @nodunit @John Spartan

FYI

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T130966
https://feedback.bistudio.com/T130967
https://feedback.bistudio.com/T130968
https://feedback.bistudio.com/T126600

[Cenwulf 40]

Really appreciate the ability to set flag, number designation and the name textures for the destroyer through 3DEN attributes.

 

Any chance of doing the same for the carrier?

[WurschtBanane 11]

The new Midrange SAMs get spoofed by chaff WAY too easy and thus are too ineffective against player-controlled aircraft. If i place an S-400 site like this:

It has a range of 10-16km, but a simple 10 flare burst just trashes the missile completely. This would not be a problem if the AI would only use 1 launcher at once, but it uses all 6.

 

So practically, you dont need to use KH58 or a HARM missile to defeat the new "Beyond visual range" SAMs. You just take an A-10, survive 4 missile shots with a couple of flares, and cannon down the site.

 

Solutions:

- Give the ability to group together these launchers and radars, so they ACT AS ONE SITE and only shoot one missile at a time

- Increase missile effectiveness against countermeasures. I mean its a radar guided SAM, not a stinger/titan MANPAD, goddamit :D

- Someone told me that the missiles did not eat countermeasures as easily when they were player-controlled (with a UAV terminal), which i did not test though. Maybe the issue is there.

[reconteam 19]

What's with the AIM-120D having a blunt seeker cover? In reality it is the same exact pointed shape as that of the AIM-120C which oddly enough the AAF jet gets.

 

Also I must admit I am a bit disappointed in the carrier. No below deck hanger, working elevators, or command spaces. A certain addon is much more detailed.

[Ex3B 266]

AFAIK, the D variant has not been made operational yet, and I can't find any pictures of it... so I was inclined to believe that the rounded nose may be a feature of the new variant (although since they are going for more range in the D, I'd think they want the aerodynamics of the "old" nose)...

As for the carrier... It looks nice, and can allow for offshore basing of combat jets... but I agree, a hangar would be nice... the Old Atlas LHD can provide space for a lot of vehicles to be stored offshore, and has working elevators so aircraft can even be stored inside... for those missions where you don't really want an aircraft carrier, so much as an assault ship that can also deploy ground forces to the shore. I'm guessing you were referring to the Nimitz though,

 

The Blackfish is a really really tight fit on the LHD, so flying armored vehicles from the LHD to shore is a bit of a challenge (MRAPs and LSVs via slingloading is easier)

A hangar deck on the Freedom would have been great for use with the blackfish...

 

But its not an amphibious assault DLC, its a jets DLC, and for Arma's scale, the freedom can support plenty of combat jets (and other forces) with the space available just on the deck.

 

I would really really really like a DLC that adds an Assault ship (with hangar bay, elevators, and well deck)+LCAC (capable of taking MBTs), and VTOL fighters (F-35 for Nato, Harrier for AAF, and a slimmer/sleeker/lighter Xian-like fighter for CSAT)... and some way to move the static sams... like either slingloading or ideally towing behind the large trucks.

On 6/26/2018 at 4:34 PM, Mr. Rad said:

Will BO1 studio consider developing a module based rearm and repair station that would allow pilots to choose their aircraft loadout on the fly while the mission maker can set up these stations on airfields and USS Freedom and choose which services and weapons are available. The loadout functionality added with Jets DLC is awesome but it would be even better if those could be chosen on the fly instead of before the mission.

I would be happy if we could make missions where the player can pick their plane's pylon loadout (if the player starts in a plane) before the mission starts, similar to infantry weapons.

Right now you can only do it in the editor.

I've used the setpylon command/addAction and some triggers to allow some basic loadout switching, but then its just selecting between some predefined loadouts (like A2A loadout, CAS loadout, SEAD loudout, mixed), and its rather complicated to set up.

[reconteam 19]

Any chance of increasing the rate of fire of the 120mm gun on the destroyer (USS Liberty) somewhat? I understand it can't be too high for balance reasons but it is still very low for a naval gun.

[LuizBarros99 7]

Hey, I was testing the jets flight model and I got baffled with how terrible they behave at altitude! Literally a MiG-19 from 1950's will out perform (in nearly every "flight perfromance" way that I can think of) a To-201 Shikra from 2035 when above 8km altitude! That is how bad the fighter Jets flight model is right now.

 

What I am pretty sure is the likely cause of the issue is likely the lack of a "Reheat"/Afterburner being modeled, and from superficial looks of things, the jet engines are modeled as just "simple conventional turbojets" in the sence that they do not have an apparent afterburner. 
I am able to assume this conclusion because nearly every "good fighter jet" that has an afterburner will have a FASTER level flight speed at higher altitudes, with the previous example MiG-19 fighter jet being able to nearly reach 1500km/h at about 10km altitude.

And on top of that, still be easily capable of climb past 15km while still being at least transonic, if not even supersonic! And we are here talking about one of the very first supersonic fighters in the world! 
So lets see how fighter flight performance evolved in about 80 years:

The To-201 barely climbs any better than a MiG-19;

It is only faster than the MiG-19 when bellow about 8km;

It is able to reach 1500km/h on the deck (actually good achievent here, since the MiG-19 is barely supersonic on the deck!);

It is unable to even maintain level flight at 14km, while the MIG-19 can easily go supersonic even at 16km altitude (Again, that is the reason why I think that it does not have an afterburner modeled!)

 

This suggests to me that the flight performance of the To-201 is just BARELY any better than that of a 1950's jet fighter! So can we see the ArmA 3 fighter jets tweaked to be able to only reach about some ~1450 km/h at sea level, but then made able to reach at least about 2500 km/h at high altitudes such as at 10-20km altitude?

This is because those are the speeds achievable by the Sukhoi Su-27, Mikoyan MiG-29, and McDonnel Douglas F-15 Eagle, all 1970's-1980's fighter jets!

Remember that ArmA 3 is supposed to take place in 2035!

[the_one_and_only_Venator 163]

13 minutes ago, LuizBarros99 said:

Hey, I was testing the jets flight model and I got baffled with how terrible they behave at altitude! Literally a MiG-19 from 1950's will out perform (in nearly every "flight perfromance" way that I can think of) a To-201 Shikra from 2035 when above 8km altitude! That is how bad the fighter Jets flight model is right now.

 

What I am pretty sure is the likely cause of the issue is likely the lack of a "Reheat"/Afterburner being modeled, and from superficial looks of things, the jet engines are modeled as just "simple conventional turbojets" in the sence that they do not have an apparent afterburner. 
I am able to assume this conclusion because nearly every "good fighter jet" that has an afterburner will have a FASTER level flight speed at higher altitudes, with the previous example MiG-19 fighter jet being able to nearly reach 1500km/h at about 10km altitude.

And on top of that, still be easily capable of climb past 15km while still being at least transonic, if not even supersonic! And we are here talking about one of the very first supersonic fighters in the world! 
So lets see how fighter flight performance evolved in about 80 years:

The To-201 barely climbs any better than a MiG-19;

It is only faster than the MiG-19 when bellow about 8km;

It is able to reach 1500km/h on the deck (actually good achievent here, since the MiG-19 is barely supersonic on the deck!);

It is unable to even maintain level flight at 14km, while the MIG-19 can easily go supersonic even at 16km altitude (Again, that is the reason why I think that it does not have an afterburner modeled!)

 

This suggests to me that the flight performance of the To-201 is just BARELY any better than that of a 1950's jet fighter! So can we see the ArmA 3 fighter jets tweaked to be able to only reach about some ~1450 km/h at sea level, but then made able to reach at least about 2500 km/h at high altitudes such as at 10-20km altitude?

This is because those are the speeds achievable by the Sukhoi Su-27, Mikoyan MiG-29, and McDonnel Douglas F-15 Eagle, all 1970's-1980's fighter jets!

Remember that ArmA 3 is supposed to take place in 2035!

 

Since Arma 3's maps are kind of small these kind of speeds wouldn't benefit the gameplay I guess.