5LEvEN

"how would you like to shoot your dildos." Has this been there at the top of the poll? I don't remember seeing that...

I think monthly updates would suffice... Weekly is just too fast... Not that I wouldn't want it, its just I think 1 big monthly update is better then 1 small update a week...

Agreed. Medics are not as fast as they should be. Also healing civilians is a nice touch. If something like taking into account what civilians think of you was implemented, obviously this ability would improve it.

While there at it they could also improve the hit boxes as well... I have noticed some shots hit perfectly in the head (blood comes off head, point blank, 5.56) still does not kill sometimes. Don't know if its because of poor hit boxes, but whatever is causing that needs to be fixed.

I will not vote on those... There are ALL unrealistic... I would like MFD's to be implemented and proper FCS... Not this arcade crap...

In arma 2? No. In arma 3? We will have the capability to make it happen. With RTT you CAN have the most realistic targeting method possible.

I think grenades should use the method that AA3 uses. If you want to see proper sights for grenade launchers then look at AA3 as well...

I like the ideas. But I would not like the dev's to spend time on them. The reason is we have the basics, and these would be used in naval combat or missions involving ships and divers. This could be accomplished by the community as a mod. I don't see any mission potential (unless we get more powerful computers) that could use all of those in MP. Which is why I would rather have it be just a mod made by the community.

Because I wouldn't be able to post :) ---------- Post added at 05:34 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:32 AM ---------- Why do people think the Mando mod is realistic? I mean really? Its just a more complicated version of the current arcade targeting system. In real life aerial vehicles use radar, MPD, MFD, visual, and Forward air controllers to locate targets... Tanks would use Thermal, normal visual, scopes, maybe radar, and friendly forces to locate targets.. ---------- Post added at 05:36 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:34 AM ---------- I don't remember a Dev ever saying arma was first and foremost an infantry simulator. I think everyone ASSUMES that because the infantry are the best simulated as of right now... Taking away the Tab targeting system adds difficulty for the crew and pilot of vehicles. It makes it more realistic...

A sewer system would make more sense... But yes I would like to see something like tunnels...

BIS should do some quick research about the safety measures put into place to prevent explosions and protect the crew inside the vehicle. A T-72 is more likely to explode when heavily damaged then a M1A2... The shells for example are kept in a easy to access compartment that keeps them safe in the abrams...

I remember watching that a LONG time ago... I bet the pilots felt like shit after making that mistake....

With tessellation you would no longer need LOD switching :D

Just to be sure... Obsolete does not mean it will be useless, nor does it mean it will not run games at max, it just means that it is not at the cutting edge any more. The 990X is now obsolete because of the 995X, for example. A component is obsolete the moment there is something newer/better out. Buying a computer today, could mean it is obsolete a few months from now... If you are referring to the definition of obsolete that means it is not made anymore, then a computer today won't be obsolete for some time (unpredictable). If this computer is primarily for arma, then PLEASE wait tell arma 3 is out. If you need a new computer, but want one that will run arma 3 max, then buy a decent rig, and wait for arma 3 to come out before committing that much money for an even better rig. You can spend roughly $800 to get everything, but an OS that will run 99% of games that have been made at max..... Thanks to the outdated consoles :D

I would wait on buying a computer if I was you. AMD is supposed to be releasing their bull dozer chips, which is supposed to kick intels @$$ (but who knows). Also Nvidia is supposed to be releasing their 6 series GPU based on the Kepler architecture. So if your patient you will have an even better computer.... Or get it a little cheaper...

Yes, but it was cancelled because of money issues. Which to be honest, it will probably cost more to R&D and field a new vehicle for the marines, so I think the decision to cancel will probably back fire.... It's not like the Comanche which was really unnecessary to try and field, a new vehicle is needed to replace the outdated AAVP7...

In order to keep it balanced in a mission, fixed wing attack aircraft would have to be taken out... Unless you're going to have it appear for a few moments for some air support then disappear.... /off topic I would much rather see fixed wing attack aircraft gone and have armor and rotary aircraft properly simulated to be honest. As of right now the only realistic thing on the A-10 is the simple things like the ADI on the HUD and weapon load out, everything else is at best semi-realistic. I could make a new thread just for all the improvements it needs. /on topic

I agree with most... Lemnos is supposed to be 2.5 times larger than takistan, so it is much more capable of fixed wing aircraft support, but is still a little small. If you make the tanks and helicopters realistic, but leave out the fixed wing aircraft, then you are putting the fixed wing aircraft at an advantage (if the fixed wing aircraft stay the same from arma 2). You have to go all out to not make anything unrealistic, or overpowered compared to real life. Helicopters having a realistic targeting system, while the current a-10a having the same targeting system would obviously make the a-10a much more easy to kill with. So you either have to remove fixed wing aircraft (c-130 could stay as it does not kill :) ) or make the fixed wing aircraft accurate as well...

:cylon: Yeah, so I can do that. :cylon:

should post the issue over on the take on chopper forums, and dev-heaven.net Maybe somebody will know how to fix it, or the dev can fix it :)

I am using a x52 controller, and I did not have any problems with dead zones. I also tried mouse and key board same thing... I can fly without any problems with or without my joystick. The thrust controls are not handled properly in arma 2... When the throttle is at 0 it should have no power, not put on speed breaks. It should also correspond to the position of the throttle. For example 50% on the throttle should equal 50% thrust. I have tried both analog and the increase and decrease thrust options for both of my joysticks, neither of them work proper. When flying in take on choppers do NOT fly like most of you do in arma 2. Make the movements of the joystick or mouse smooth and small. Think ahead and plan ahead with your controls. If you try to fly like arma 2, then you will most likely spin out of control...

You have never played a flight simulator then.... Naval combat is not seen in arma.... Infantry combat is already up to par with current limitations, yes, minor improvements are needed... Soft skinned vehicles are already being improved with things like physx, and are not needing much more other than damage improvements, which every vehicle in arma needs. Armor and aircraft are still quite far from being a simulation. Instruments are things like counter measures, gauges, MPD's and MFD's (and all that is displayed), HUD, and all controls are instruments in a real aircraft. I would hardly call those eye candy...

Why does a future setting mean a completely different game with different weapons? Why not a future date, but with current weapons and gear. Maybe you could change things that are known facts to be changed. For example ACU to Multi Cam. If you keep it like this, it will be realistic, won't be far fetched, and will still be in the future. Besides I thought it was NEAR future not 20 years from now....

There are more then just gauges when you are talking about instruments. For example the MPD's... Which without RTT are not capable of being fully functional. ---------- Post added at 12:22 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:20 AM ---------- Uh, I should of been more clear. Information that is not already indicated on the HUD. So for example a flight plan. I also meant in vanilla not with mods. Mods are great, but make finding multi player games difficult, as the server has to have those mods or enable them... ---------- Post added at 12:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:22 AM ---------- You can fly FSX without a joystick. You can fly Take on helicopters without a joystick. I bet with a little work you could fly DCS without a joystick (you would have to change the controls that is all). Having a joystick just adds to the realism, it is not necessary....

In what mod where you able to change the MPD's? And on top of that was it even displaying useful images? /off topic The gauges in the A-10A in arma display incorrect data on most... That means it is not functional. Load up arma and look at them, I already have to double check my statement... :rolleyes: I don't consider something a feature, or functional unless it actually works. The gauges are present, but do not work. /on topic