LeeManatee

well, in ofp you was flying a rail road angular train in arma 1 you was flying a a brick in arma 2 you fly something like a light brick in toh you fly something like a helicopter ;) it doesn't feel that angular. ofcause it takes some time to get used to but it's much more comfortable then in arma 2. so yeah

it's not HARD it's just different a bit. helicopter feels like a helicopter and not a railroad-truck/brick in air. more responsive controls, so it's really comfortable. well, just wanted to read a response from bis like: "yeah flight model will be adjustable in difficulty settings" so i could say hell yeah, i love you bis and take my money now!

in toh it's indeed difficulty dependent, and ocause i'm interested if such settings will still stay here, because it will be EXTREMELY more enjoyable then arcadish flight model. http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/4645/takeonh2012082215353813.png (197 kB)

well, it doesn't really answer the question. there are 2 models: arcadish and full. and i'm interested if full model will be implemented in arma 3 since i fucking enjoy it and i would love to set full flight model in difficulty settings.

question to devs, just to clear something out: will be there complex "expert" flight model from take on helicopters or not? atleast in settings

if zxc is still here then everything is good. i assume that shift once is change of walk/run. if so - perfect.

err.. sadly i didn't try GC version but from what i read i can assume that current animations system works same as @smk = one modifer key, while rest is more or less the same as arma 2. and i assume that to run in tactical pace you press ctrl. all i can say: GREAT NEWS! this is how it should be and i would FREAKING LOVE to have these controlls, even tho i use Alt as modifer while i play with @smk. ( freelook is on mouse button ) BIS take my money NOW!!! EDIT: but if for some reason you will decide to change it ( please don't ) leave an option to be able to play with classic controls

nothing to see here. thats a troll.

suggestion for camo: thats the real issue. camo supposed to blend you with surroundings and the larger distance the harder to spot you. what about some easy solution like... textures become more transparent depends on distance? since arma cannot simulate eyes and camo mechanics

yeah, thats the real issue. camo supposed to blend you with surroundings and the larger distance the harder to spot you. what about some easy solution like... textures become more transparent depends on distance? since arma cannot simulate eyes and camo mechanics

what about turn tactical pace in low ready stance. this will solve possible run and gun and will be realistic

1) Will there be weapon resting / bipoding? 2) Will there be separated weaponry controls for gunner and pilot in helicopters /planes? 3) Will there be fast roping from helicopter? 4) Will there be improved controls ( being able to set trimmers on axis instead of buttons ) 5) Will we be able to lean with leaning head ( toh-alike track ir implementation ) instead of moving to left/right which is horrid?

err... simple ------------------------------------- sure list: these features have irl plot nowdays and it's not game breaker type of unit and avaible features for 2nd screen infantry map-gps-compas. vehicles/helicopters/aircradts map-gps-compas thermal cockpit tools guided rockets camera ------------------------------------- arguable list: features that still have plot nowdays but quite tricky itself. type of unit and avaible features for 2nd screen infantry mounted cameras, ability to see each soldier camera for squad leader acess to UAV camera interface vehicles/helicopters/aircradts mounted cameras, ability to access each camera for platoon commander acess to UAV interface commander MHQ access to UAV controll acess to squad leaders/platoon leaders and possibly soldiers cameras ------------------------------------- this sounds quite beliveable & realistic and not game breaking

never happy is not true. i'm fine with current announcement since i always was for dayz standalone rather then mod/addon to arma 3. it's reasonable that you guys will hurry up for cash opportunity like this atm, since hype may go down and there may/will be more concurents. my only concern is that dayz should not affect arma 3 and arma series. i.e. core mechanics of arma should not be talored towards dayz. i'm okay with arma 3 delay since you had to make dayz first, but if you delay it, please make sure that you will add features like 3d editor, mod support/download, weapon bipoding, fast ropes, trimmers, and other things that makes arma better. we ( arma player base ) can wait for it, since arma is the only game in milsim-ish genre, but please add these and other features if you delay arma, not cut things out just for the sake of other project. we can wait. anyway, yes, finally standalone. glad to see it. congratz.

this is such a minor detail that can be ignored right away. this is just making something more complicated for people with 2nd monitor. with same logic you may say that in order to rotate my head with track ir i must press something first. it doesn't make sense. i got track ir because i don't want to press anything ingame to change my view. i got 2nd monitor to be able to see map all the time without need to push a button to do so. and once again, map on 2nd screen is not a game breaker or something that give any advantage to person with 2nd screen. it's just more comfortable to use it. same goes for track ir: it's more comfortable to rotate hea instead of push the button and use mouse or using numpad but it doesn't give you any advantage. it makes experience better. nothing more. same goes for joysticks: it's more comfortable to fly with joystick and more authentic, but it doesn't give you any advantage, if you can't fly no matter what joystick you got you will still suck. but its rather fun to fly with controlls similar to real helicopter controlls rather then on keyboard and mouse, even thoit may be more precise to use mouse. so i can't agree with your point

picture in picture being able to use 2nd screen http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?138316-Better-useage-of-2-or-more-monitors for example being able to see thermal/map/transport tools there and continue from here: future soldier system: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?138316-Better-useage-of-2-or-more-monitors&p=2202983&viewfull=1#post2202983 it's supposed to be used like tool for orientation, marking positions, and communication. not a all-see-eye obviously. just.. more advanced version of gps. person with one screen while "MAP" button is holded he operate with it in half of screen just like traditional map. he still can move around i guess. for example for opfor future warrior display located on their left arm, so when you hold "MAP" key it gets bigger and on down left side of your screen, for blufor that use land warrior alike system it appear in top right corner. person with 2 screens hold "MAP" button he operate on another screen just like person without 2nd screen. the only difference is: when he press "MAP" button his main screen stays the same but cursor move to map screen entirely and work like traditional map. advantage of person with 2nd screen is extremely slim, so i may even say that he don't have any advantage over person with one screen only.

so far the only idea i got about how system like land warrior may be implemented for players without and with 2nd screen is: it's supposed to be used like tool for orientation, marking positions, and communication. not a all-see-eye obviously. just.. more advanced version of gps. since according to recent video sources it doesnt use any weapon cameras and so on. person with one screen while "MAP" button is holded he operate with it in half of screen just like traditional map. he still can move around i guess. for example for opfor future warrior display located on their left arm, so when you hold "MAP" key it gets bigger and on down left side of your screen, for blufor that use land warrior alike system it appear in top right corner. person with 2 screens hold "MAP" button he operate on another screen just like person without 2nd screen. the only difference is: when he press "MAP" button his main screen stays the same but cursor move to map screen entirely and work like traditional map. advantage of person with 2nd screen is extremely slim, so i may even say that he don't have any advantage over person with one screen only. but, even if there would not be such option for people with one screen, and even if map screen will be avaible only for people with 2 screens it would not make much difference/give advantage to person with 2 screens. ^ absolutely agree with this statement i don't see any irony here, or you belive that there will be no trims in aircraft vehicles, soldiers will suddenly become rambos and shoot people dual weild? i belive that arma should not end up as run and gun game. additional features like using 2nd screen isn't something unrealistic.

i guess this is the problem nope, i provide facts and references that using additional screen atleast for combat map is realistic and authentic for 2035 warfare. obviously. we are going in circles. read this one: then please, don't bring the word "realism" to excuse your true intentions. i heard exacly same crap when people started to whine about suggestion to add track ir support on some other forum about some space game "OMG! I DUN HAFF IT! THEY GOT ADVTNEGA! NO! NO! DON'T ADD IT!" why the same crap here? there are a plot and irl references for using such systems nowdays. please, when next time you bring word "realism" to justify something, make sure that it's actually realistic and not how you wish it to be. to summ up all your words and statements: "i don't have *it*, so don't let anyone else who got *it* use *it*" sounds quite ignorant, doesn't it? *it* may be described as: joysticks track ir additional screens other peripherals paste any you like. remove it all and you will get your favourite game: counter stike!! i already understood your intentions to summ up all your words and statements: "i don't have *it*, so don't let anyone else who got *it* use *it*" don't worry i would not miss it. just tell me please, what are you doing here and how you manage to play arma instead of your favourite counter strike, when arma allow people to use joysticks, track ir and so on?

even when it's against logic and common sense? i see. just to let you know: 2035 =/= 2012 okay, let me ask you something, with all current advance in tech and especially in PDA ( huge success of iphone, ipad and so on ), using systems like land warrior in actual warfare even as testing, would not you find it reasonable to assume that portable devices which are commonly used nowdays will be used even wider and become same common things for military like washing machines for civilians? even tho there are lots of experts keep saying that future is all for portable devices. i'm not talking about some holo-tech and other sci-fy stuff for example gauss tank, but rather real things that you can see everyday all around in your life. very ignorant aswell. if nowdays real life comparisons make you laught and you think thats "ITS ALL MAGIC!" and you live somewhere in 15th century, then you should probably start some witch hunting and set on fire people who use computers, gps and portable devices. just a suggestion.

while it's not realistic at all if we are talking about 2035 while there are future soldier systems developing nowdays i.e. land warrior, while it's not realistic at all since you use gps to drive somewhere today instead on looking for right page in paper road map. so your argument stay invalid untill you will provide some points to prove it. i gave you few irl references, shown usage of additional displays in helicopters, planes and it's commonly used nowdays in transport for example in strykers. at the moment all irl references tell that this is realistic and authentic, while you didn't provide any argument to prove your point that opening a paper road map instead of gps is realistic. heck, gps is not real! woah, thanks for personal offence, this is really make your argument valid. then please, don't bring the word "realism" to excuse your true intentions. i heard exacly same crap when people started to whine about suggestion to add track ir support on some other forum about some space game "OMG! I DUN HAFF IT! THEY GOT ADVTNEGA! NO! NO! DON'T ADD IT!" why the same crap here? there are a plot and irl references for using such systems nowdays. please, when next time you bring word "realism" to justify something, make sure that it's actually realistic and not how you wish it to be. heck it's one and the same, no matter if thats plane/helicopter/vehicle/soldier, seriously. the only difference that soldier on foot. so your argument is still invalid. you just try to excuse the point that you don't want people with spare monitor to use it because you don't have one by any means, even using word "realism", while it most certainly go against current day tech, irl refferences and common sense. still want to tell me that opening paper road map instead of looking on gps is realistic? to summ up all your words and statements: "i don't have *it*, so don't let anyone else who got *it* use *it*" sounds quite ignorant, doesn't it? *it* may be described as: joysticks track ir additional screens other peripherals paste any you like. remove it all and you will get your favourite game: counter stike!! this is just hilarious, seriously

when i bring up irl points it's actually make sense since someone around here was saying that: while it's not realistic at all if we are talking about 2035 while there are future soldier systems developing nowdays i.e. land warrior, while it's not realistic at all since you use gps to drive somewhere today instead on looking for right page in paper road map. so your argument stay invalid untill you will provide some points to prove it. i gave you few irl references, shown usage of additional displays in helicopters, planes and it's commonly used nowdays in transport for example in strykers. at the moment all irl references tell that this is realistic and authentic, while you didn't provide any argument to prove your point that opening a paper road map instead of gps is realistic. heck, gps is not real!

argument is invalid because it's possible. not because it's not wide used yet. with all advance in computers, pda and internet nowdays it's quite realistic. tell me, when you drive somewhere, you use gps, right? google maps or some paid analogue. and you don't have to open paper road map and stop to check are you on right turn or not. you just look on phone screen, see your position on gps and drive. Don't you feel bad that this give you unfair advantage before drivers who use paper road maps?

helicopter / aircraft controlls to be able to trimmers on axises instead of keys. and please! NO run and gun. slow down tactical pace to speed of smk tactical pace

bother to reply to this one? there are analogues of future warrior developing in several countries including Russia, so this should be pretty regular thing for 2035, if you look on phones evolution recent years and compare your old simens a55 from 2003 to iphone let's say 2007 you will see that it become quite regular to have phone these days and it's more then just a phone.

doveman, same post as mine above goes to you.