Jump to content

Photo
- - - - -

Plane and Helicopter handling


  • Please log in to reply
204 replies to this topic
Thread Starter
1988MAtej
1988MAtej

    Private

  • Members
  • 10 posts

#1

Posted 04 June 2011 - 20:40

I'm curious what's BIS plans on making Aaircraft handling more realistic. The current Arma 2 system is a joke. I'm a big fan of plane simulators and hope to see some improvements

nodunit
nodunit

    Second Lieutenant

  • Members
  • 4354 posts

#2

Posted 04 June 2011 - 21:16

Maybe, if more tech from TOH is utilized but I wouldn't bet on it too much, Arma is moreso a jack of all trades kind of thing.

ArmAriffic
ArmAriffic

    Master Gunnery Sergeant

  • Members
  • 1267 posts

#3

Posted 04 June 2011 - 21:42

http://forums.bistud...splay.php?f=109
Dunno about planes though
Spoiler

b00ce
b00ce

    Master Gunnery Sergeant

  • Members
  • 1401 posts

#4

Posted 04 June 2011 - 22:34

I'm curious as to what is going to be translated from TOH to ArmA3.
LG 34UC97 34" 3440x1440 monitor | 2x GTX-980 G1 Gaming
I7-5820k @ 3.3GHz | 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4 @ 2133Mhz
Samsung 840 EVO 120GB & 1TB SSDs | Seagate 3TB HDD
TM Warthog | Saitek Pro Flight Combat Pedals

Demonized
Demonized

    Warrant Officer

  • Members
  • 2653 posts

#5

Posted 04 June 2011 - 23:34

i hope they keep air vehicles handling the same as it is now, easy arcadish, with some simulation usable for anyone, including noobs or non sim guys.
then they can earn extra cash on for example let TOH owners use that flight control in Arma3 instead of the default one, do same for fixed wing with a TOP game or something.

It would be great for those really into sim flying to actually being able to bring that iinto the mainstream of Arma3.
I for one would easy buy TOH if it allowed me to pilot a heli like a real strong sim in arma3.

Edited by Demonized, 04 June 2011 - 23:36.

My scripts:



Any new mission editor or scripter in Arma2 should have read Mr Murrays Editing Guide Deluxe at least once, it still applies for A2 even though it was made for Armed Assault.

b00ce
b00ce

    Master Gunnery Sergeant

  • Members
  • 1401 posts

#6

Posted 05 June 2011 - 00:02

I think that flying in ArmA should be as realistic as they can possibly make it without sacrificing other aspects of the game. Hell, I believe that they should make EVERYTHING as realistic and with as much fidelity as they possibly can, be it driving, ballistics, flying or running around. Flying should require a lot of skill, same with driving and sniping. This would discourage the infamous "Airborne Medic Sniper Pilot" that crashes into everything. It would discourage these people who are not dedicated to learning and make them find out what they are best at/have the most fun doing and do it/get better at it. It would encourage people specializing in certain fields; granted this happens a lot now, but I believe that the balance between jack of all trades and specialists would shift.
LG 34UC97 34" 3440x1440 monitor | 2x GTX-980 G1 Gaming
I7-5820k @ 3.3GHz | 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4 @ 2133Mhz
Samsung 840 EVO 120GB & 1TB SSDs | Seagate 3TB HDD
TM Warthog | Saitek Pro Flight Combat Pedals

Demonized
Demonized

    Warrant Officer

  • Members
  • 2653 posts

#7

Posted 05 June 2011 - 00:15

@b00ce
what you are saying will also discourage much of the paying customer base of Arma since they like the specops AT medic pilot role.

I am not sure, in fact i do truly believe that Arma3 cannot survive on hardcore sim players alone, this is too much of a niche, but allowing the option to be bought if desired would not impact this, in fact it may draw even more potential players to the game, those that only wish to fly, and fly sim only not the current arcady simulation.
My scripts:



Any new mission editor or scripter in Arma2 should have read Mr Murrays Editing Guide Deluxe at least once, it still applies for A2 even though it was made for Armed Assault.

5LEvEN
5LEvEN

    Staff Sergeant

  • Members
  • 276 posts

#8

Posted 05 June 2011 - 00:25

I think flying should be a skill. As of right now everyone can pick it up within a few minutes of practice. I would like to see flight mechanics and gameplay similar to microsoft flight simulator.

Steakslim
Steakslim

    Warrant Officer

  • Members
  • 2020 posts

#9

Posted 05 June 2011 - 00:40

Anyone may be able to pick it up. But only a few can really use them well, and this shows at times. If you play on some clan servers you'll notice the same select few are often pilots, usually because they are dependable on not getting shotdown/crashing/mid air collision with other aircraft at base/can make hasty landings without autohover.

However I'm all for adding more difficulty/realism to the flight model. It'll create a bigger, better gap between the mediocre and the exceptional pilots, and keep the former from being able to brag their way into a pilot slot with their BF2 l337 flying skyllz
__________________________________
Intel 2700k Sandy Bridge @ 4.6ghz | EVGA GTX680 x2 | Corsair H100 | Corsair Vengeance 8gb ddr3 1600 | EVGA z77 FTW mobo | Asus Xonar DX 7.1 | 2x OCZ Vertex 4 SSD 128gb | PC P&C Silencer Mk II 950W

-APS-Gnat
-APS-Gnat

    Captain

  • Members
  • 6401 posts

#10

Posted 05 June 2011 - 01:58

Anyone may be able to pick it up. But only a few can really use them well


Yeh, and if ArmA3 can force a little more of that across all areas of gameplay, but not too much otherwise people will be pissed and annoyed with trying to play with different stuff.
ie, each vehicle or weapon type needs time to get used to, so people can skill up a little.

For aircraft I think a little more simulation, turning cirlces, mass vs airflow, proper stalls, proper damped undercarriage, even thrust vectoring, would be nice for raising the bar a bit.
Posted Image

beagle
beagle

    Chief Warrant Officer

  • Members
  • 3698 posts

#11

Posted 05 June 2011 - 02:07

I think flying should be a skill. As of right now everyone can pick it up within a few minutes of practice. I would like to see flight mechanics and gameplay similar to microsoft flight simulator.

MS flight Simulator isn not a good option to start with...the flight model in FSX is not much better as the one in ArmA2... and in some aspects it's even worse.

5LEvEN
5LEvEN

    Staff Sergeant

  • Members
  • 276 posts

#12

Posted 05 June 2011 - 02:11

MS flight Simulator isn not a good option to start with...the flight model in FSX is not much better as the one in ArmA2... and in some aspects it's even worse.


In what areas is it worse? According to actual pilots FSX is very realistic.....

beagle
beagle

    Chief Warrant Officer

  • Members
  • 3698 posts

#13

Posted 05 June 2011 - 02:16

In what areas is it worse? According to actual pilots FSX is very realistic.....

FSX is only near realistic with payware addons..the stock aircraft are far off...747's can perform endless loopings and Helos are untrimmable and uncontrolable etc.

The main problem is that FSX is no flgutb simulator..its an instrument and cockpit simulator with a excel sheet based "flight model" that fails outside of normal general aviation flight parameters. FSX does not even know what airflow is or what a stall does.

In fact you can't stall the stock planes...they all fly on rails.

Edited by Beagle, 05 June 2011 - 02:46.


5LEvEN
5LEvEN

    Staff Sergeant

  • Members
  • 276 posts

#14

Posted 05 June 2011 - 02:21

FSX is only near realistic with payware addons..the stock aircraft are far off...747's can perform endless loopings and Helos are untrimmable and uncontrolable etc.

The main problem is that FSX is no flgutb simulator..its an instrument and cockpit simulator with a excel sheet based "flight model" that fails outside of normal general aviation flight parameters. FSX does not even know what airflow is or what a stal does.

In fact you can't stall the stock planes...they all fly on rails.


You must have a different FSX than I have. My FSX takes into account wind. I have managed to stall a plane (on purpose :D). The helicopters are flyable (they are similar to arma 2's helicopters, just more complicated). So I really do not know where you are getting this from.

---------- Post added at 02:21 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:20 AM ----------

FSX is only near realistic with payware addons..the stock aircraft are far off...747's can perform endless loopings and Helos are untrimmable and uncontrolable etc.

The main problem is that FSX is no flgutb simulator..its an instrument and cockpit simulator with a excel sheet based "flight model" that fails outside of normal general aviation flight parameters. FSX does not even know what airflow is or what a stal does.

In fact you can't stall the stock planes...they all fly on rails.


Wait... Just remembered something... You do have all of your difficulty options turned to realistic right? Cause on the lower difficulties you would experience that...

beagle
beagle

    Chief Warrant Officer

  • Members
  • 3698 posts

#15

Posted 05 June 2011 - 02:50

You must have a different FSX than I have. My FSX takes into account wind. I have managed to stall a plane (on purpose :D). The helicopters are flyable (they are similar to arma 2's helicopters, just more complicated). So I really do not know where you are getting this from.

---------- Post added at 02:21 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:20 AM ----------



Wait... Just remembered something... You do have all of your difficulty options turned to realistic right? Cause on the lower difficulties you would experience that...

Yes I have but i Simply have tried out DCS, X-Plane and IL-2...FSX is weak in al aspects exept Instrument simulation...it's a cockpit and IFR simulation with very weak FM...the helo FM is the weakest part of it....and only a handfull of payware planes for FSX perform really in a en velop that can be labeled "real".

5LEvEN
5LEvEN

    Staff Sergeant

  • Members
  • 276 posts

#16

Posted 05 June 2011 - 02:56

Yes I have but i Simply have tried out DCS, X-Plane and IL-2...FSX is weak in al aspects exept Instrument simulation...it's a cockpit and IFR simulation with very weak FM...the helo FM is the weakest part of it....and only a handfull of payware planes for FSX perform really in a en velop that can be labeled "real".


If you have no real piloting experience than you cannot say it is worse or better than another simulator. I suggested FSX because of the good reviews by actual pilots.

beagle
beagle

    Chief Warrant Officer

  • Members
  • 3698 posts

#17

Posted 05 June 2011 - 03:07

If you have no real piloting experience than you cannot say it is worse or better than another simulator. I suggested FSX because of the good reviews by actual pilots.

I have real piloting experience...in so far that I leased me a plane and a flight instructor once for a few hours and three flights of 1 hour each just because I wanted to know...the plane was a Do-27 and it did not flew on rails like the one I have in FSX... I performed manouvers up to 3g so not only left and right.

As soon as you have the stick in your hands and you're airborne you stop calling FSX "real". Its good for instrument trainign but far from real flight performance...the weak points are stalls of any kind, low speed handling, high speed handling and tailslides and "falling leaf" behaviour.

5LEvEN
5LEvEN

    Staff Sergeant

  • Members
  • 276 posts

#18

Posted 05 June 2011 - 03:11

No simulator (as of yet or to my knowledge) is perfect... You have options, and you must choose one.

b00ce
b00ce

    Master Gunnery Sergeant

  • Members
  • 1401 posts

#19

Posted 05 June 2011 - 03:12

@b00ce
what you are saying will also discourage much of the paying customer base of Arma since they like the specops AT medic pilot role.

I am not sure, in fact i do truly believe that Arma3 cannot survive on hardcore sim players alone, this is too much of a niche, but allowing the option to be bought if desired would not impact this, in fact it may draw even more potential players to the game, those that only wish to fly, and fly sim only not the current arcady simulation.


If people truly wanted to learn how to fly, they will. It's a learned skill. If they REALLY want to fill the medic sniper pilot role, they should train themselves. I fly ArmA more than DCS and X plane because of one very important thing, combined arms. You don't have people who are just flying, you have people on the ground, you have people in your cargo; REAL people, not just bots. Because ArmA is a simulator, I don't see why BIS can't pull all the stops and go all out.

I think flying should be a skill. As of right now everyone can pick it up within a few minutes of practice. I would like to see flight mechanics and gameplay similar to microsoft flight simulator.

FSX is a terrible helicopter flight sim. It's essentially on par with ArmA now, save for the landing gear/wheels working and switches being flippable.

Anyone may be able to pick it up. But only a few can really use them well, and this shows at times. If you play on some clan servers you'll notice the same select few are often pilots, usually because they are dependable on not getting shotdown/crashing/mid air collision with other aircraft at base/can make hasty landings without autohover.

However I'm all for adding more difficulty/realism to the flight model. It'll create a bigger, better gap between the mediocre and the exceptional pilots, and keep the former from being able to brag their way into a pilot slot with their BF2 l337 flying skyllz

Exactly, and that goes for everything else.

Gnat;1945835']Yeh, and if ArmA3 can force a little more of that across all areas of gameplay, but not too much otherwise people will be pissed and annoyed with trying to play with different stuff.
ie, each vehicle or weapon type needs time to get used to, so people can skill up a little.

If BIS took that approach, nothing would get done. ArmA 3 is a completely new game, and they should treat it as such. I think BIS should push the boundaries. Frankly, people should adapt to the game, not the game be dumbed down to match the people. Think of it like exercise, if you don't step outside your comfort zone, you won't get better.

For aircraft I think a little more simulation, turning cirlces, mass vs airflow, proper stalls, proper damped undercarriage, even thrust vectoring, would be nice for raising the bar a bit.

Mass vs airflow sounds like a very tall order, unless you're talking about wind effecting flight, which I think is imperative. Along with the speed indicators reading air speed, not ground speed.

Edited by b00ce, 05 June 2011 - 03:18.

LG 34UC97 34" 3440x1440 monitor | 2x GTX-980 G1 Gaming
I7-5820k @ 3.3GHz | 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4 @ 2133Mhz
Samsung 840 EVO 120GB & 1TB SSDs | Seagate 3TB HDD
TM Warthog | Saitek Pro Flight Combat Pedals

5LEvEN
5LEvEN

    Staff Sergeant

  • Members
  • 276 posts

#20

Posted 05 June 2011 - 03:15

^Basically this...