Higher altitudes?

[Liquidpinky]

I always thought the speed was measured in km/h?

It is configuarable between km/h and knots and feet and metres in take on. You get to use real pilots measurements instead of some european rubbish. :P

[zimms]

You really want to discuss wether metric or imperial is better, or which one of MM/DD/YYYY and DD/MM/YYYY makes more sense?

[Liquidpinky]

You really want to discuss wether metric or imperial is better, or which one of MM/DD/YYYY and DD/MM/YYYY makes more sense?

Depends, I am old enough as for both of them to make sense.

[CarlGustaffa]

You get to use real pilots measurements instead of some european rubbish. :P

European rubbish? Afaik (and I'm into aviation btw, the general kind ) european pilots use feet, knots, and miles (nautical), as they all blends superbly with the navigational concept. Russians use metric. Other than the navigational aspect, is that so bad? Sure, you get different rule of thumbs but they do exist also in metric. Otoh, you do get unified units where ground and air forces speak the same language without conversion. Try dividing an aeronautical map into MGRS and tell me what you find

I prefer feet myself (for aeronautical usage, metric for the rest), but I won't deny russians to switch to metric or western pilots switching to metric while flying russian equipment. A friend of mine is checked out on the Antonov AN-2, where everything in the cockpit is metric - "a bloody nightmare until you actually get used to it", he says.

[Qazdar]

guess why! because it's not a dedicated flightsim. To make it look like in the vid above you would need 1000's of km² of landscape

All you need is some engine tweaks ...

[BobcatBob]

VBS2 2.0 can have maximum terrain sizes of 300x300 Kilometers is it so unreasonable to expect the capibilty of having maps that are 100x100 Kilometers in Arma 3?

Plenty of room for realistic jets if you ask me...

[Liquidpinky]

VBS2 2.0 can have maximum terrain sizes of 300x300 Kilometers is it so unreasonable to expect the capibilty of having maps that are 100x100 Kilometers in Arma 3?

Plenty of room for realistic jets if you ask me...

Isn't South Asia in Take On 100x100k already?
Sure feels like it.
As I said earlier, before people realised I was actually correct with knots speed, that it can take 5 to ten minutes at 730 knots to cross it. Usualy finishing off gliding the rest as the aircraft has burned up all it's fuel at full throttle.
I am also using 20k draw distance on that map.


Bottom right of picture you will see the distance to waypoint, the picture is taken roughly just North of the centre of the map.

[DMarkwick]

VBS2 2.0 can have maximum terrain sizes of 300x300 Kilometers is it so unreasonable to expect the capibilty of having maps that are 100x100 Kilometers in Arma 3?

Plenty of room for realistic jets if you ask me...

The issue is not so much one of size, but implementation. It all has to be populated with appropriate scenery. Chernarus has set the standard here otherwise it becomes a jet-centric map, and less useful.

[BobcatBob]

Ahh, ok, yeah you'd probably need a whole team of experianced map makers (and a damn good PC I'm sure) to get that size done with good quality!

[Fennek]

Isn't South Asia in Take On 100x100k already?

Quantity isn't Quality. I don't think playing infantry in take-on would be very pleasant, unless you want OFP charm. For Take-On it's sufficient, it's a flightsim after all. But not for Arma3.