Daniel

So far TakOH really isn't that much more difficult than Arma 2 anyway (once you're set up properly). I was making carrier landings with mouse and keyboard within a few attempts. The jump in flight model from Armed Assault to Arma 2 was much more noticeable. Of course I expect that to change once they start adding features like wind and turbulence to their full effect, but I don't expect to find those in Arma 3. So unless they really want to keep the TakOH flight model unique to TakOH (which would be understandable), I don't see why they'd have to nerf the Arma 3 flight model.

As it is now, Q and Z are mapped to Increase thrust and Decrease thrust respectively. Change these to Q = Thrust (analogue) and Z = Brake (analogue). That way you have digital control over your throttle; you hold Q for maximum collective and Z for minimum. Letting go knocks it to 50%. So you have to hold Q down OFP style for maximum speed. You get used to it though and start doing it instinctively. You don't have to worry about how much throttle you have at any point and you get instant response. Note, any advice I give is purely for mouse and keyboard players. I intend to get proper peripherals myself once TakOH is released but till then i'll keep testing the previews this way.

Make sure you keep a hand on that mouse, use it for constant gentle corrections and use your keyboard for the bigger, more predictable moves. Make sure you've remapped your throttle and break keys too. I can basically fly as I would in regular Arma 2 with just mouse and keyboard and auto-trim enabled. I can land accurately on the Khe Sanh anyway. I can just about take off, circle once, and land again in roughly the same spot with Auto-Trim disabled, only just though.

Okay, i've just read the advice on remapping the thrust and brake to analogue. Thrust is really responsive now, i'm on the way to mastering mouse and keyboard flight.

Marek's stated that he expects BIS' new ventures to feedback into Arma 3. So while I wouldn't begin to expect a full heli sim within Arma 3, I do expect choppers to handle more realistically compared to Arma 2. I don't expect several control types though, I think they'll try and find a happy medium where it's easy enough to get from point A to point B and fire some rockets, but still takes time and skill to master.

Agreed with Celery on the keyboard flying, the throttle needs to be more sensitive. Not a big issue for me though, i'll be buying some proper gear when TakOH is released, looking forward to it!

I don't quite understand what they're unimpressed about? What are these "actual flight sim pilots" intending to simulate exactly, the "simulation" of staring at a virtual helicopter? Because the rest of us have slightly more focused expectations concerning handling and a realistic environment. Surely they understand BIS must have its reasons for altering the designs slightly, and that even BIS expect the community to build models that are accurate real world representations. But like Big Dawg said, let them be unimpressed. The rest of us are going to enjoy the only sim with 2011 visuals, realistic handling, a highly detailed environment and the ability to step outside...

For chilled, night/dawn/dusk missions, you can't beat an Oceansize instrumental track: O9s0WfQCCYY

inb4 Ride of the Valkyries I've not played any real heli sims, and whenever i've flown in Arma i've always had real radio comms to focus on. I'll come back to this. I'm sure there'll be opportunity for some seriously epic music throughout the campaigns, along with some nice chilled stuff to pass time and set the scene. Are you considering getting permission to use existing pieces of music, or are you after pointers for original work? Or: ⇩ What DM said.

Yeah, SIX Updater is perhaps not the best example when you consider all the controversy that surrounded it. I know some people find it really easy, it still confuses the hell out of me. :p

And that is exactly what I meant. It's the sort of little thing that really pulls you into the game world.

Good to see there are still some die hard players kicking around! And it certainly was die hard back in the day... But it did help pile on the pressure when you were the lone survivors and you knew the rest of the (now dead) platoon was watching your every move and talking about you in the other TS2 channel. Good times.

I wouldn't see a problem with heat shimmer, it'd look really cool when driving on a warm day or when looking at jets and helicopters.

You have to consider what gameplay value you'd actually gain from that, considering it would make things more complex. Personally i'd say an overall weapon accuracy slider per unit would be enough. I can see the realism value of it though, that either someone knows how to use an RPG or they don't. But I think a slider would deal with that better than a binary tickbox option, and then it starts getting complex... What we have now (correct me if i'm wrong - been a while since I was actively building missions) is an weapon accuracy slider per side, which is dictated by either the player's config file, or the server config if playing multiplayer. This value needs to be definable per unit by the mission editor, separate to the current Skill slider.

AI bugs deserve a separate thread. I don't think there's much we can discuss about them until Arma 3 is released, besides the obvious. I think many issues are being confused here. By classes, do we mean actual AI ability such as accuracy and hearing, or routines such as reaction to contact, fire and maneuverer, etc. Because although an insurgent and a professional soldier may well have comparable shooting skills and bravery, their style of fighting should be noticeably different. This should be definable in the mission editor.

I agree 100% with the OP, this seems the next logical step to make the whole variety of conflicts more authentic. I really hope BIS have already or are prepared to consider this.

I find it extraordinarily difficult to take this thread seriously.

I'd be this angry: |<----------------------------------------------------------------------------------->| Not to scale.

Ah, I hadn't really heard of NOTAR before, thanks for the heads up. I can see why you thought that now.

That depends entirely on what happens when your VW reaches 88 mph.

Ducted fans?

I imagine the side props are necessary to counter main rotor torque in a hover. I'd love to see this helicopter feature in Take On. It'd make an excellent executive commuter choice.

That would be a massive fail. What's an infantry sim without its fully interactive cockpit ey? The mind boggles. I'd settle for higher fidelity flight model and weapons systems first...

And available to the civilian transport market and probably considerably less complex and cheaper. Makes sense to me.

Indeed, for it to be science fiction it would require a major advancement of technology beyond science's current capabilities. So then you're entering the realms of directed energy weapons, anti-matter weapons, miniaturization of railgun and high energy laser weapons, etc. I don't think we'll see any of that in Arma 3. Every single item so far, be it fictional or otherwise, uses conventional technology. The Astute class, the Commanche, the Mi-48: all technology derived from the 20th century. The only thing approaching science fiction, in my opinion, are the weird eye things on the Iranian soldiers. I'd like to hear more about those.