x3kj
-
Content Count
2581 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
-
Medals
-
Everything posted by x3kj
-
This so much. Flying jets in 3rd person gives the impression that this is some flappy bird game (amplified when using keyboard).
-
When you stall in arma, all function of the controllsurfaces are taken away from you (mechanically, visually you can still flop them around). The aircraft is then forced into a certain position that (should) cause you to fall down, therefore gain speed, therefore get out of stall.. When making "a halt" mid air, up to recently the plane would roll sideways to the left, until you are at 90° bank and then stop. Not sure if still the same but i assume it is. The only controll that is not removed is thrust. However, factor of thrustamount is dependant on speed. At 0 speed thrust is barely existant in vanilla planes. I assume they did that to increase take off length. Realistically, when falling down "like a brick", the new center of drag force drag (90° angle of attack) will usually be behind center of mass. Means your plane will tip over and go head first (after some falling time). Provided its not some really unstable aircraft design. This is pretty much a design criterion for modern planes. When stalling they need to automatically recover by distribution of forces alone.
-
This was already the case long before, but the recoil was determined only by the projectile "damage stats" - so not really tweakable. That would be great, thanks
-
Thank you for this addition. Do i understand it correctly that value 1 is the standard we currently had? Does this act as modifier to the "default" recoil force (based of some undisclosed function involving the projectile damage values) ? Because if yes, that would mean recoil force could only be reduced (infinitely), but not increased at all. Is there a way this could be changed to be a simple factor, without limit? The recoil force depends on the damage properties of the projectile, which is not good for when the damage needs to be lower, but recoil visually higher. I made a ticket a while back. https://feedback.bistudio.com/T121475 Alternatively and preferably even, the impulse should just be a raw value for recoil force and the contrived dependency on projectile damage properties removed. Because if it is just a factor, then everytime damage properties are adjusted one has to readjust recoil as well. Also, is the recoil still exclusive to shotShell simulation? Or has this been changed?
-
when he says landing is bad he means that they have too much lift compared to the drag at given flight parameters. Because having too much lift vs. drag leads to not beeing able to make a proper landing approach. If you slow down for landing normally you have to increase AoA quite a bit to increase lift, which should cause more lift induced drag. This makes controlled decend easy. When the plane has too much lift and not enough lift induced drag at slow speed, you have to dive straight on into the runway (otherwise you gain alt) and level of at just the right momemt to not explode. Or make an extremely shallow approach. Also, seeing the weird "in goo" behaviour of the airplanes (observable when launching a plane into the air via force command) i'm not surprised if this would reduce sinkrate significantly.
-
RE: NATO 5.56 and 7.62 Damage Mod
x3kj replied to darkxess's topic in ARMA 3 - ADDONS - CONFIGS & SCRIPTING
Its impossible to perform config changes (which this mod does) via script. -
No, vice versa.You are confusing yourself. There is projectile termination. Three kinds - termination on velocity = 0, termination on first impact, termination from time>TimetoLive. And there is damage. Damage gets caused by every impact. Amount of damage depends on velocity deviation from typical speed (muzzle velocity), on % of speed lost in the penetrated body and on explosive factor. Projectile pens Plate A, loses 50% speed -> some damage (not 50%) is caused to Plate and surrounding; Projectile pens Plate B, loses rest of speed -> again damage to plate and surrounding. You positioned the guys on the wrong side. Damage is on the entry side, not on exit side because exit side is occluded by geometry lod of the wood panel. i have tested enough to know that what i say is correct.
-
The penetration mechanics are ok. Whats not fine is the ammo simulation for anything that is not a pure HE or, pure Ball/AP shell. No fuze settings for time delay, no options to spawn subammo on impact (HEAT), dodgy damage calculation based on velocity lost in components, dodgy internal damage radii. https://feedback.bistudio.com/T120542 the penetration system could use some values where you can tweak the random angle of projectiles leaving a penetrated body per bullet or material, and different penetration thickness for heat projectiles. Overmatching mechanic would be cream of the pie (projectile with high energy goes through thin plane even at extreme angle when the plate cant sustand that force) . But i seriously doubt that they would implement that for arma. With the penetration and damage system right now and some simple scripting you can make some pretty advanced damage systems (like warthunder, minus the spalling effects and minus overmatching) - if one can find a way to mitigate the issues mentioned in the ticket above. Maybe ill post a video example soon.
-
increased thrust, thats all apparently.
-
It is no bug. It has always been this way. A projectile deals hit damage and indirect damage on every single penetration. 20 objects penetrated (e.g. bush) -> 20x damage. Impact effect is also displayed 20 times. The projectile only terminates when velocity reaches 0 (hit terrain ground or something it cant penetrate). UNLESS explosive value is >0.7, then it terminates immediately on first impact. the projectiles you think have a "fuze" are just using an explosion particle effect as impact effect, instead of some leaves dropping or dirt spray like on rifle rounds.
-
You think, but i know. Read what i wrote. Test it. And you will see that i'm correct.
-
why im tired of arma 4 topics & why im against arma 4
x3kj replied to lato190's topic in OFFTOPIC - Games & Gaming
I am a modder and i cant wait for arma 4. Ill gladly convert my totalconversion project to the new engine. Multithreading improvements, light improvements, less legacy bullshit issues, less silly undocumented features, ... -
These projectiles are not exploding. They are causing area of effect damage upon impacting on anything, multiple times when possible. Their "Explosion" is just the impact effect. If they penetrate 20 sheets of paper they will cause 20x the damage. You complained about unrealistic rounds. This is totally unrealistic. So i tell you again: either penetrating, or exploding.
-
Thats why properly designed indicators have the "optimum" point marked very visibly, and the acceptable limits marked as well with color coding or some other form. This has nothing to do with the units one uses, because you can position those "quick glance helpers" without needing a unit to match up exactly with that point or area. If the indicator is too busy to read it at a glance, the notches need to be reduced by half, a fifth, or whatever instead (like i showed) therefore making the values inbetween imprecise and less important, but the display quicker to read. HMI design is an important aspect of engineering. If the design is bad, it is bad - simple as that.
-
There is no "penetrate and then explode" in Arma. Either, or. As it stands anyway... here is the ticket https://feedback.bistudio.com/T82243 So even if they wanted they couldnt rebalance it to what you would want without introducing new bullet technology.
-
amphibious? do you have a proper buoyancy lod and enabled it via geo LOD and config? That said, it could be that it just doesnt work at all with Planex.
-
the sample models are the place to start. Learn how configs are structured by studying them, learn how addons are structured. Then you can look closer at the model side of things. bohemia interactive wiki has a couple of articles dealing with configs, vehicle setups and also model topics (LOD)
-
No that does not explain it at all. Like i said, you can simply make the notches for readout spread further apart, the pointer thicker and the dial smaller. All those things reduce precision, without requiring introducing some arbitrary unit. HMI design 101. And if by indexer you mean "good/ not good" you can combine this into the numeral display by colored segment...If your readout is soo imprecise that you shouldnt even include numbers then i wouldnt call it an Angle of Attack indicator... Imprecise AoA & G-load indicator example:
-
I can only imagine that they are used to tapping the w and s key with different frequency. Its just a matter of getting used to it... The new throttle mode gives much more granularity and controll in normal flight. Chosing a different scale on the indicator while keeping the physical unit does that as well... You can put 4 notches on a watch dial ,6 , 12, 60 and many other in between, thus determining granularity. Of course you can also convert them into some abritrary "time unit" specific to each watch and call it a day... "May i borrow your watch?" "Yes sure, but remember to divide the time by 0.871."
-
for the sake of constructivity (is that a word?) i'd say it would help if you could elaborate more on what you find difficult about them, so devs know what to change. Could it be that its just the newly changed mechanics/ keybinds for transitioning between "vtol" and "fixed wing" mode ?
-
... americans have an obsession with using arbitrary non-standard units, no susprises there. However, i would think that more modern planes use indicators showing degrees
-
I took the SU-25 out in DCS and made some tests for my own. AOA (degr)@ speed (km/h, IAS) to keep level at 1km alt: (0.75@800, 1.25@700, 4@600, 5.5@500, 11.5@400, 14.5@350, >20@300). With full flaps in comparison its 2@350 for example three words: vectored engine simulation :P
-
speaking of topical literature, if anyone needs a meaty good-night lecture, i can recommend Fluid-Dynamic Drag by Hoerner
-
Proxies of the crew have to be present in firegeometry to be calculated for damage. They also have to be unhidden. What is in the visual LOD doesnt matter/count. The shot looks like it missed. Like i said, you have to be extremely precise. The silly pose they are in doesnt help this of course. Depending on angle of impact and also randomness, penetrating objectiles can change direction significantly. The firegeometry of the vanilla tanks is extremely dodgy. Since it doesnt really matter, due to the issues with the damage system, and there is no way to actually see whats happening (no killcam like in warthunder) its not really obvious. Proof it does work - insta snapshot of moment of hit: Look in fullsize, you will note the faint red line of the projectile path (there are two outside, the other one missed and "ended" somewhere on the turret "ring"). Gunner? He dead. There is no death animation for this however. Commander was missed by some millimeters -> nothing. On a follow up shot (but only after i setdamage of tank to 0) i killed the commander as well.
-
i know, i was just "translating".
