@ProGamer

In real life? It has 2 20mm cannons, and 2 rocket pods.

Info-- 2 x 20mm cannons, 2 x 70mm rocket pods CRV7, 8 x TOW ATGM

@ProGamer

Its not really about balancing here, i kinda made it sound like that though, now that i read it over. The Wildcat in A2 had a 25mm Pod. I can't understand why they changed over to 2 M134's.

Two gatlings... to be exact, its the same thing as the Blufor AH-9 Pawnee, just on a bigger heli. One 25mm pod would make more sense, though, i've taken out a Marshal with the Gatlings easy. That, and the Opfor Marid. The 25mm Pod though, it would be better for balancing out the weaponry of Blufor's light scout, and Greenfor's light scout.

What's the Merkava real tank round in real life?

Agreed.

+1 Upvoted.

I like this idea. BIS, remember the salt flats? In real life, that fills up. Why not have this instance in the weather feature, but not too extreme. Maybe you can raise the water level, ONLY enough to fill the salt flats.

+1 Up-Voted

Well, seeing as these doors were an accidental pass over from Take On Helicopters, and they never meant to have them in the first place, it makes sense to take them out on BIS's part. Not only that, but, i can even see parts of Seattle in the reflection. HOWEVER, i think it's fair, that they fix the reflection on the doors, and release the door models for the Civilian faction since they screwed up and now allot of people are disappointed. It would surely make allot of people happy, and save the stress that would occur, if they were to say... re appear in the Helicopters DLC which was stated to only provide 2 more helicopters and some new engine features. Would be mis-leading if some doors and FLIR pods were to magically show up as paid content as well.

It'll be fixed when the Expansion comes out, in fact, is already fixed on their special build, along with a handful of new water related improvements. But I'll up Vote this.

Up voted.

I do think that the reflection off rain needs a slightly more glistening look. Slightly.

Up voted.

... No, it wouldn't explode Arma 3. They just need to make better particle effects, or make use of new water technology in the matter. Not sure how long it would take, but it can be done. They look horrible right now, and doesn't even stay around long enough.

Probably both. Hehe, but yes, the section on the wings, and the rear.

Or not as mods, but as a realism style thing. Not just for jets, Heli's too. IT's not about stripping down an aircraft, but rather about giving mission flexibility as a whole. In other words, if you want only a gun on your aircraft, you should be able to choose only a gun pod, and that's it. Now all you have is your gun pod. Or if i wanted more AGM's , i would put AGM's on the hard-points. If i wanted free fire rockets over AGM's , i would equip rocket pods. Simple. This should be the same for Heli's. If i wanted to switch out the Minigun's on the Hellcat for the 20mm Gun-pod, i should be able to do that, as it's doable with the real life counterpart, and provides many options. I would be able to equip 2 AA missiles on the AH-9, or 2 AGM's with it's miniguns. Or maybe 4 AGM's and no minigun.

Yes, we have already understood about these scripts that can do these things. Scripts can do a lot of things. But this is a feature that's being requested. As in, this should be something existing within vanilla content up to working standards. When weapons are switched, the models appear on the vehicle.

Ahh, yes. The C-192, well hopefully. Although a two seated fighter would be much more interesting and bring back a classic, having other types of fixed wing is never a bad thing.

They had 2 seats in the SU-34 in Arma 2. In fact, it is faster is faster than the To-199, and on chernarus, which is a smaller map. I remember crossing the map 5 times in under 1 minute, and a half. Though I agree, training is one thing, because there are people who have asked me to teach them tricks/tips. It's also useful if the gunner can spot things you may not have. But it would also look really nice to have a two seated To-199.

Really? Where did you get that information? That's be cool.

BIS, it would be great if a Two seat version f the To-199 could be introduced, with maybe some improvements. For example more bombs, or AGM's, a camera for the gunner. It was great having a two seat fixed wing aircraft in Arma 2. Please, bring it back. You can use the same model as the To-199, and add the gunner seat.

Changed from Gameplay, to more "Feature Request".

Thanks Druid! =D

The Yak-130 is the trainor 2 seat version. The model we've seen a picture of that BI is currently developing is the Yak-131 which is a one seat light attack variant. It would only make sense for them to make two seat aircraft, it was in Arma 2, and was great for team work.

I mean, it would not only look amazing, it would make Arma 3 feel so much better. I mean it would fit in perfectly to have two seater variants to add more value as well, to the fixed wing assets.

As Progamer said, and again, it's not a balancing issue. The ability exists, and has existed since Arma 2, BI, just hasn't touched on this since release. It's a simple issue that's to b fixed.

@B00tsy That is not the point. In real life, you can pop one flare. Skilled pilots use flares in a hot zone. Why penalize game play as if it's something like an RPG, when it is a Simulator. This is simply a broken mechanic, that needs to be fixed. There will still be an option for burst flares, but the single flare needs fixing, so i don't really see the problem.

Matter a fact, this should have been fixed via. patch 1.02. It cannot be that complicated. Cant understand why they didn't.

Exactly right Linkin. That is why this needs to be fixed.

Precisely.

Could it be Nvidia who helped with the new PhysX Aspect? But back on Topic, The whole thing here, is to have it set in the Vanilla more realistically, as appose to having to get mods in order to fly to a certain level. These posts are based on the Original product.

That may be a temporary fix, but i'd rather have it fixed in vanilla in order to use the drones without a scripting solution. And thanks fireball.

I don't believe that is why they removed them, i don't believe a mission maker would purposefully use enough lights to cause the overlapping issue to occur. When i used the lights nothing bad came of it. I agree, they need to bring back the lamps section, and if there are overlapping issues, which i'm sure there are, it can be worked on whilst allowing mission makers the room to use them wisely.

Ok, that sparked an idea from a game i played called YSFlight Simulator. The most simplistic thing ever, and you cant really call it a simulator, for reasons you'd have to try to believe. Ok, to point, the way thrust worked in that game is much like how it woks in TOH to some respect. "Q" and "W" handled thrust, and the Tab key enabled/disabled Afterburners. This being said, in Arma 3, they could make it to where you can raise thrust via. "Q", on a bar. When you let go of Q, the thrust level stays at that level you left it on, keeping that amount of thrust unless you either increase it more or decrease it. This means that on take off, you can increase it to full and let off the thrust till your at designated altitude, before pressing "Z" some to bring down the unnecessary extra thrust. I think this would be a fantastic idea to help the thrust physics in Arma 3 improve.

@the_Demongod, you are correct. the reason people stall out is because they assume either pulling hard on the flight stick, or holding "S" on the keyboard should give them a constant turn. This is false. In real life, your aircraft cannot hold a constant turn that way, especially without afterburners. That being said, most keyboard users will have a problem with this, but those with a flight stick should try a new approach, and finding the right limit between thrust and turn. It can get a bit more complicated in terms of turning, but im going to keep that bit to myself. ^.^

PS- im a keyboard and mouse user, and i have no problem with flying, or stalling out. If you wish to watch me fly with Mouse and keyboard, watch my CAS mission here - = http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1B3fVJgTIM = -

The only plane you have available to you at the moment is a L-159 ALCA (A-143 Buzzard In Game) The craft is a single/two seat trainer with a medium power sub sonic engine. You cannot attempt to do serious High G maneuvers in it, due to the fact you WILL stall out, just like i real life. It is not a fighter. Don't treat it like one. Although, i do agree, over all, the flight models do need improvements over their Arma 2 counter parts. In terms of realism anyway. I prefer realistic flight over Arcade like performance. +1 Vote.

They already have chaff, and flares. It uses both, and it is simplified. when you deploy flares, you see the flares disappear, but look closer, and you see small circles still remain in the path of where the flares were deployed. As for the missiles, idk. I am an ace and personally came to find i out maneuvered 3 missiles after running out of flares in a hot zone... or maybe i was just that desperate. What i did is taught in real life. Turn away from the missile, and as it gets closer, pull hard in another direction to defeat the missile. It saved my life.

The F/A-18 doesn't fit the 2035 era. Maybe they need to make the more modernized version of the F/A-18. Dont remember the name of it. Its got some stealth features though.

Id like to say although the trust is nice on the aircraft, the in game flight model does need work over the long run, if not short run. The aerodynamics are OK, but not the best, the stall out on the ALCA is a bit over stressed. Maybe implementing aircraft weight, say, after using payload the aircraft becomes lighter, and when fully loaded heavier.

This feature is much needed.

Was he soaking from the rain? (hehe, kidding, but that would be funny)

What they need to do is look up the physics of all the aircraft they implement in the game, and go off of that. Structuring flight models from their real life counterparts, is something that BI SERIOUSLY needs to look into. This way, it creates the balanced and polished feel of what the game needs. You get my vote on this one. +1.

this and the ability to launch only 2 flares via. key binding (in options, vehicle settings still broken) NEEDS to be fixed.

Pettka! Plz fix. =/

EDIT: New features have long since been added and they would be great to have ok Arma, for example, built up falling rain at distance in for of a transparent down draft cloud, and also mountainous hugging clouds that would go perfect in mountainous regions in Arma 3. Being able to access all of this would make Arma 3 a REAL sandbox.

Any news on this? Is there any way to access more of these features? Like say unlock the snow for custom maps? Or lowering cloud level?

I just can't understand why they wouldn't add this feature. Than again, i still don't have an option for the dynamic fog in the Vanilla Editor. Not too impressed about that.

I believe this can actually be fixed, but the quality of the clouds would be far higher than what it is now. This may be an issue with the clouds not being as transparent as they and fluffy as some showcases I've seen, not sure how that can be accomplished, but when they are transparent, not only does it improve that glitch, but visually enhances the clouds by a long shot, and the lighting on the clouds also appear to be better.

Example of the softer transparent clouds, over the rougher ones.

[IMG]http://gamingbolt.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Simul-Software_TrueSky.jpg[/IMG]

When was this ticket assigned?

The bottom picture makes more sense, and just looks right all together.

What your saying is that you want to be able to turn the plane's thrust essentially to zero, and still fly through the air via. gliding? This is possible by turning off the engine. The planes brakes, and Air Brakes are controlled by "z". If you fly the Tu-199, you can see the air brake come up. For the other jets, not sure for animation. But I've turned my engine off and glided around 3 clicks, and landed safely.

Personally, i think this should stay. Even though it's very hard to fall for, some people do, and that might mean the difference between life or death in a survival situation. I've done it in Hardcore Wasteland to survive, was stranded, someone drove up, looked at inventory, i got out, shot him, took his vehicle. Would have lost everything. Besides, you can play dead in real life. sooo...

That makes NO logical sense. Quote-=-

"For example, roleplay missions and mods would benefit from this option a lot. It's very hard for eg. cops to track and keep their tabs on the civilians, if they can change their clothes at any time. The permanent ability to change your clothes in the game at any time makes the missions hard to design and very hard to balance. Thus adding the option to disable the ability to change the clothes in MP is necessary."

Isn't that the point in life mod? It is supposed to be dynamic. The reason for changes cloths in the first place is to not get found. Some play it smart, but then you have those that run around with their heads cut off. Cloths changing is very important, and especially in role play. Also, if you cant keep tabs on someone when their name clearly pops up when your 10 feet away from them... well... wow. But as for that, im forced to down vote, as in role play, you don't want to be in the same cloths for ever. Civilians change cloths every day.

^^ this.

Pettka, i believe you mis understand that we are talking about the actual function, rather than the hint on how to activate the function. What this ticket is reporting, is that ounce you try to switch firing modes, no matter what version of the "Hint" we use, it does not exist in game. I've been told that the function for this was a config bug, and could be fixed quite simply, but that was... close to a year or two since i heard that. If you could maybe change this to un-resovled until is actually been... resolved.

I could see this happening if it were an AI problem, in which is false, because the AI handled flares in Arma 2 with both modes available, as they do in Arma 3 without it. Not only is it not an AI problem, it's already been proven that in real life, you can pop a pair a flares other a whole handful. So it makes no sense to me. You can make a DLC to add i a realistic flight model, much choose not to include a realistic feature of aircraft that could benefit the base game. It's strange... And quite simple too, which is why i'm confused as to why it was decided oust. I mean, the only thing i can see a problem with changing the flares mode, is the sounds. It sounds like the under slug grenade launcher firing automatic. But even than, that's no reason to leave it out. But i guess decisions are decisions... GG

Nope, i posted it on the Feedback Administration on the Forums. Should be fixed soon hopefully. Its been almost a year now

Needs to be edited at "NOT RESOLVED" so people don't think it's fixed, when its not quite.

Alright, ill check it out when or if it's implemented to the dev build. Thanks much!

Can you update this info? It seems it's been assigned, but hasn't been touched since.

No, it depends how you use them. I could make a video but id be forced to use Arma 2. Until they fix this. There should be a main branch update by next week, so hopefully it's fixed by than. Fingers Crossed.

This needed to be fixed in the patch 1.02. Cant understand why they didn't do it.

I agree, only if they don't sue Arma 2 Animations for it. For example, have the ability to drag a downed soldier, and have their legs and arms rag doll so it looks good. Same with carrying. Have their arms and legs rag doll while you walk with them over your shoulder.

Maybe they should make a script where it will force the players character to start stumbling, and slow to even a crawl as a long term consequence of running more than 2km's. That seems realistic right? Ill notify the devs. No seriously, if the blur gets annoying, maybe your doing something wrong. In real life, you get tired, you rest from your run, and catch your breath. In Arma, if you get the blur, it should have the same results. When you start loosing focus, rest. There are many ways to simulate fatigue, but if they were to do it in a way that wouldn't cause you to rest, than it wouldn't be realistic. If that doesn't encourage you to rest, than your simply gonna get shot because you failed to see a guy to your right, due to tunnel vision. Then again, having the player fall down for 3-5 minutes after running too long, doesn't seem like a bad idea. Then you can have someone walk up to you, run around you in circles, and then shoot you. Rest is important. Don't ignore it.

While we could possibly see this kind of stuff with the Marksmen DLC, i wouldn't mind seeing suppressors for the Large guns. My view point is make it suppressed, but make it the supersonic suppressor. Therefore, it can be heard in absolute silence obviously, but significantly quieter than if not suppressed. But during a large battle, you may not pick up the sound, which i the best time for a silenced sniper to take action whilst there is plenty of Audio distraction to hide in.

This is not a bug, it is realistic. These munitions have cams in the warhead tips that track their target ounce fired, so when you fire in the opposite direction, it automatically tracks and finds its target to kill. This is what those kind of missiles are programmed to do. Same with the TOW from Arma 2. Fixing and issue that isn't broken will be like changing the 2035 technology, to cold war technology. Case and point, it is not a glitch. Gonna have to down vote this one.

Let me clear this up. Snipers take positions in many different ways. Standing, crouched, up against a tree sometimes, in bushes, on ridges, anywhere. There are many different ghillie suits. In Canada, we have many, for many different scenarios. Mostly though, they are full suits, almost like fatigues. You can store ammo in them. I've seen a sniper climb a tree and stand in the top, and i tell you, at first sight, you would never know. Never. If the front were not covered in this position in particular, on the other hand, you would probably notice. Case and point, having both variants, will be VERY realistic. After all A3 is a Mil Sim, and BI are working on making the best. Be Patient.

+1 Up Vote.

One solution. JSRS 2.0, and @Real Sound.

Why dont Arma 3 explosions look like that?