What sort of physics do you want for the heli's?

[jammydodger 0]

I know a lot of people love choppers and in OFP you didn't have much control over them, so what sort of physics system would you like to see in Armed Assault?

1.Realistic

2.Semi realistic

3.unrealistic (easy to fly)

Lets have your thoughts.

[colligpip 0]

1.

[chipper 0]

i want my chopper to fly like a f*cking chopper should.

pointless topic.....

[jammydodger 0]

So chipper do you have a joystick?

[stakex 0]

If you ask me, your question makes no sence.

Realistic does not mean they have to be so hard to fly you need to spend countless hours practiceing to get the hang of it. This is not a chopper simulator, and the way it was done in OPF is fine and fairly realistic. It could stand to be improved a bit, but it was simple and made it easy enough to fly without makeing it unrealistic.

And I think Chipper hit the nail on the head...

[kegetys 2]

Better avionics would be more important in my opinion.

[bn880 5]

I'd primairly enjoy a great flight model and realistic controls. Avionics would be cool, but not with the current FM... not for me at least.

[Jinef 2]

3 with option for 1.

Avionics .... only if infantronics are done :P

[xnodunitx 0]

Hmm..I'd have to say for it to be something like optional,for the highest reality,the main rotor blades bending at high alititudes plus the engine straining,the head taken into account,though these would make for more realistic things they would take longer to impliment...and speaking of which didn't they post a new forum rule saying not to ask for suggestions and such considering that its a bit late now?

[TheBladeRoden 0]

semi-realistic.

Realistic directional controls, but not so sensitive that any attempt at turning will quickly become an uncontrollable spin and a charred small junkyard on the side of a hill.

[jammydodger 0]

Quote[/b] ].and speaking of which didn't they post a new forum rule saying not to ask for suggestions and such considering that its a bit late now?

I wasn't asking for suggestions I was asking what people would prefer.

Personally I would prefer to have it semi realistic, you cant beat the feeling of swooping through the valleys dodging tree's then popping up and taking out a enemy.

[shadow 6]

Personally I would like to have it realistic, you cant beat the feeling of swooping through the valleys dodging tree's then popping up and taking out a enemy (while keeping an eye on the rpm when coming to a hover).  

But the most important is the avionics and weapons systems. If I want to fly a helo-sim I fly LB2.

[Capitaine Haddock 0]

Realistic, no doubt.

The best thing in OFP is that the gampley balance comes from reality. Make the choppers too easy to fly and they'll become deadly air-quake UFOs. If they fly as they should people will use them as they would in reality.

It's like asking "Should the sniper rifles have an auto-aim just because I can't shoot?" of course not! Just learn to shoot

[GBee 0]

It has to be semi-realistic with the client side option for realistic. Controlling a realistic craft without all the proper equipment* would be incredibly hard.

I'm all for realism, it is why I love OPF, but the various vehicles available all use different controls in real life for a reason. I wouldn't expect to control a car with a joystick or a helecopter with a steering wheel and certainly not any of them with a keyboard! Some compromises have to be made.

*(e.g. An analogue joystick, cyclic, pedals, IR/Motion head tracking etc)

[kerosene 0]

I'd say semi realistic, id like a bit of realism, but I think a lot people expect to much from the game engine really, its not a flight simulator and it never will be. Its irritating when someone makes an aircraft addon and people start bitching about handling and crap.

I want to be able to control the thing with a keyboard, since I mostly play as infantry, what I really want is for the AI to be able to fly around without crashing.

[AtR 0]

Realistic for the win

[Capitaine Haddock 0]

its not a flight simulator and it never will be. Its irritating when someone makes an aircraft addon and people start bitching about handling and crap.

OFP wasn't born as a flightsim, but thanks to the hyper-detailed environments and the high-quality addons it has become my favourite helicopter sim. You can do so much more that in any dedicated helicopter sim despite the lack of avionics, and the physics are not too bad as they are, to be honest

I'm sure I'm not the only one who loves flying helos in OFP. It'll be a shame to dumb-down the physics. Personaly I'll be more than happy with the same level of difficulty/realism as in Battlefield Vietnam. Perhaps with a little bit more workload on the rudder pedals, but VBF Vietnam's physics were pretty close to the real thing anyway.

[jammydodger 0]

Yeah I like the heli's in BFV to, a good balance of realism and fun factor

[Jinef 2]

Very very few helicopter sims come very close to reality.

Unless you have massive resources at your disposal you are not going to come very close to reality. Games want to have some reality but not so much that you need 6 months of play time on the 200 training missions that you can actually go into combat.

However with some more effort and time you can make it very fun and fairly real in a game.

What people deem to be fun, the point and click approach to flying helis in OFP now just boggles me. You might as well watch TV.

[max power 21]

I think that the controls, as they are, are good. What I hate is the performance envelope, currently. It's not that I don't like the control scheme, it's that I'd like to have more control over the helecopter. Maybe some more altitude would be better. Also, having some very, very simple LOD for the island texture beyong the geometry draw distance would aid in making medium altitude flight seem like you're hovering over a fishbowl, like it is currently.

[.pablo. 0]

Quote[/b] ]Very very few helicopter sims come very close to reality.

Unless you have massive resources at your disposal you are not going to come very close to reality. Games want to have some reality but not so much that you need 6 months of play time on the 200 training missions that you can actually go into combat.

well, is it the flight model itself that is unrealistic, or the manipulation of the necessary buttons? i remember reading the acounts of several former huey heli pilots talking about flying the hueys in Vietnam Medevac was just about exactly what it was like to fly a real huey (in fact they said it was harder in the simulation due to the lack of peripheral vision). of course, a vietnam era uh-1 is no uh-60 blackhawk; a modern blackhawk surely has much more complicated computer systems that the pilot has to be able to interpret and manipulate.

my point is, one of the things we should clarify is the difference between flight model realism and manipulation realism (having all the bells and whistles).

another thing to consider is how a realistic flight model will necessitate changes with other parts of the game. for example, once you allow a blackhawk/apache to go up a couple thousand feet, you have to start thinking about viewdistance, engagement distances, ai, etc. everything is connected.

it's certainly exciting thinking about all the possibilities!

[Metal Heart 0]

If the view distances would be realistic and aircraft would have realistic AG armament, it would be required to have AAA, SAMs and fighter jets to balance things. This would lead to adding counter measures, like chaff, flares & jammers, air-to-air radar and ground radar to aircraft. Anti-radiation missiles and everything... I'd guess it's safe to say that we are not going to get all this in ArmA, for one the map and view distance are likely going to be way too small for this kind of air action, not to mention the huge amount of work needed. So, I'm presuming well get the same dumbed down arcade style again in ArmA, since it's mainly a ground forces game, and that physics will be better but definately not an aircraft sim.

[brataccas 0]

I hope that arma MH1 doesnt fly like the vbs1 MH1 its so unrealistic it handes like an RC heli which is really dumb

[4 IN 1 0]

i dunno but somehow i feel the chopper control BF style have something going very wrong, well yeah they might have some physics that tried to similate the real chopper but it turns out that it make me feel that my hands have never putted on the control, even my hand had get really really sweatty and tired on my joystick, same with keyborad, nomatter whatever ways you adject your control, and nomatter how slight and tiny your control it goes out of the windows like you flying in a bloody tornado(well someone said something BF style plane is kind of realistic too but when i saw how they take off.......blahhhhhh)

well realistic is good, but plz for the love of god dont make it to a BF style socall "realistic"

[john_mcclane 0]

I think semi-realistic is more along the correct lines for this application. I agree with "4 IN 1" in regards to not needing it to be at all like BF2. I think it should pretty much be as it is now in OFP, but possibly tweaked more towards realism. And also, I'd love to see the "eject" option totally REMOVED. If something goes wrong, you shouldn't have the option of magically ejecting through the rotor blades. You ride it in and hope for the best. A much better auto-rotation setup would be great as well. Could also be interesting if there was some way you could fly from the co-pilot seat (in the helos where this makes sense). Picture flying a blackhawk with your buddy and mid-flight handing the controls over to him. That would be very cool.