Don’t buy it.EDIT - I retract that part…just be aware of what you are getting, read some reviews, and make a decision based on facts rather than what you might expect…my expectations were unrealistic) Or, at least, that is my impression five minutes into it. And the immediately apparent reason not to buy it is that they didn’t fix the awful fixed wing flight dynamics. There is NO horizontal component of lift. Roll into a bank, and the jet continues merrily straight ahead until you pull. It is awful. It is worse than awful because the implication when you create DLC and sell it, that you are going to make it good. This is awful. So far. I’m pretty disappointed at how bad it is.
ARMA Jets always did have this odd way of being able to roll and never lose pitch, so it’s a shame they are still keeping it so light. I mean, even a lookup table simple flight model would be do-able, unless they think they are doing some sort of fly-by-wire thing that isn’t like real fly-by-wires.
I mean, something like an AT-6 ‘future modern’ (so they avoid license issues) remake would be better for ARMA rather than jets, at least in terms of maps size (or maybe it has that already, not sure).
On the up-side, the DLC updates do usually include a whole bunch of stuff in base ARMA for free, so you took one for the team.
Yeah…I am very happy with their rotor.lib stuff for the helicopters…even if it isn’t DCS quality…it is good enough. So I sort of expected a…I dunno…fixedwing.lib to happen or something. And obviously it didn’t. And unfortunately, the flight model is sooo bad that it is pretty hard to suspend my disbelief about it. I’ll test some more tomorrow…and see what I see…
And the good news is the very first post in the BIS DLC forums about the Jets DLC asking for feedback addresses the flight model issue. So it is the first thing mentioned…which I guess is good…
"The biggest issue is one specific point of the flight model. If this was enhanced, i would consider fixed wing flight reasonbly well implemented for what the arma sandbox represents. The biggest problem with the current FM in my eyes, is the miniscule nose drop when banking. I just fired up DCS and rechecked the F-15c’s behaviour in a 60° fighter turn. The nose comes down pretty hard and additionally, the aircraft is pushed into the turn because the lift of the wings forces the plane not upwards but into the direction you are banking. You know that stuff better than me, i am sure. Is there anyway the fixed wing FM could implement this behaviour? Its not just a question of realism/authenticity, but i forces one to steer the plane quite unnaturally. I often force the nose down quite heavily with rudder. Shallow banking angles don’t turn the aircraft properly in arma, for the lack of that sideward push when banking. I know the Apex Caesar plane has a bit enhanced flight characteristics and sure feels a bit better It has that nose dive and sidewards lift implemented, although a bit weak i would say (not a real life pilot so who knows :)…). "
"The flight model is bad, really bad. I was not exspecting DCS standards but at least something like Warthunder standards, which is a free-to-play title.
The FM is not from this world and does not rely on any physics from this planet. Planes roll on a perfect axis when banked, instead of turning slightly. For turning you have to roll 45-90 degrees and pull the stick, you can eben get the jets to fly backwards without droppign the nose by banking to 90 degrees zero thrust and nose up… thats all wrong. You can even fly inverted without stick force and since the is no lift axis is does nothing. The whole FM seems to be tailored for mouse and keyboard use, not for HOTAS users with deep Flight Simulator affiliations."
This has been the problem with Arma3 and I am terribly disappointed that the Jets DLC did not follow in the footsteps of the Helicopters DLC. It’s not like they had to change much or that they had to hit even the basics of a DCS level flight sim … they just had to hit the basics!
This is the reason that I avoid ever flying the Arma3 fixed wing anything. Not going to do it while it is this broken.
For such a great infantry focused game, and all of the units that they have added to support that infantry game, this is one aspect (and maybe the only aspect) that I would ever give them a 0/10 on. I’d rather not have it. Everything else, in my mind, is 7/10 or above and most is 8/10 or above.
I’m kind of shocked by this attitude. Arma is an infantry simulator. It does not have the map size to be a flight simulator, it does not have the technical chops to be a flight simulator. No where was a flight model improvement promised. How are you going to have realistic flight models on runways that are 300 meters long? How do you take a combat aircraft with a viable combat load off in such situations? How do you accurately aim and attack in a 2km visability model in that situation?
What were you expecting?
Every vehicle in Arma exists at the sufferance of infantry. The fact vehicles are in the game is to provide transport and fire support for infantry. What this update was centered around was enriching how sensors played out, how AAA and aircraft interact with JTACs and find targets, and expanding their ability to engage targets on the ground by giving them TGPs. This is all to provide depth for the person providing CAS so his experience is not “orbit, tab, lock, shoot, obit, tab, lock, shoot”. Again, no where did they promise a dynamic flight model.
Gentlemen, I suggest you rejigger your expectations. I’m not getting mad there’s no Normandy 1984, I fail to see how a lack of AFM in a game that doesn’t have the infrastructure to support it qualifies as a significant disappointment.
I think it’s because it looks so darn good that even if it just did a ‘Strike Fighters 2 ~2009’ on the flight models then it would be good. The Helo DLC really did some nice stuff with flight models, so unencumbered with any actual knowledge it was a nice wish to have.
Infantry is the ARMA lifeblood for sure, and given the price points in the flight sim space, it represents value at like $10.
Let’s get Imagine intensive. I don’t like to brag (yes I do), but I’ve got a pretty hefty computer. My view distance in arma is 4.4Km, which is fine for just about everything, without reducing me to <45 FPS
Everything beyond that creek would be gray fog. You would need to be flying the CAS wheel, trying to find targets without running into the terrain, and dodging ground fire. I don’t see how fighting a stall increases the enjoyment level or adds to the immersion of what is already a gross extrapolation.
It’s getting upset at the Orange vendor because you decided you actually wanted a Watermelon.
Yeah I am with @near_blind on this one. If you are not humping a pack and a rifle over that next Ridge, or directly supporting the guy who is, you’re playing the wrong game. Why do you think BI switched to made up jets? They got tired of hearing that the A-10 doesn’t fly like one. Made up jets, made up flight models.
When a mission designer adds a plane to a mission it’s so that the bombs or rockets will equal out the extra enemy assets that have been placed to oppose the boots. No one is served by that jet careening off the runway because someone didn’t know how to lock the nose wheel steering.
Oh and dirt bikes don’t handle like dirt bikes either. Still ok.
On one hand I know it’s not a flight simulator. I’m not expecting greatness from the jets. Not near FC3 quality.
But I was hoping for… better.
I was hoping for somewhat improved flight dynamics and a better way for fixed-wing aircraft to support the guys on the ground. The new sensor effects are nice but, besides that, I don’t see much that wasn’t already provided by free mods.
The view distance has always been a limiting factor.
Is the throttle axis still a pain? Before it seemed like you were either MAX or Idle/Boards; nowhere in between… or at least I couldn’t sort it out.
Sure, it’s an infantry simulator that does helos quite well.
I agree, I was fooled by the name and didn’t fully read the description. “Jets DLC” implied to me that maybe this was like the Helo DLC. I was wrong.
None of that really matters - I don’t want accuracy to the nth degree, I just want an airplane (even one that goes 60 knots) that when you bank it, it turns. That seems to me a very basic principle.
Exactly. It seems it wasn’t touched. It wasn’t even made better. That is what I’m disappointed at.
EDIT - it is just my position that I thought the Jets DLC would do for the fixed wing what the Rotorlib did for the helos. Clearly that wasn’t in the plan and I’m disappointed. Hopefully the other features (that I haven’t explored yet) will have been worth the money.
Oh, and I retracted my “Don’t buy it” recommendation. Fixed wing mechanics are but a single thing in an expansive list of added features and sensors and stuff…so that doesn’t seem fair. I’m happy to support further A3 development with my purchase, even if the one thing I was hoping would be improved wasn’t.
I probably should not have posted as I was really tired from a long day at work.
I agree. Arma3 is much more than the vehicles and I know that the Jets DLC adds a lot of other features but I am disappointed that the fixed wing flight model was not touched. And that is a source of perpetual disappointment.
Don’t get me wrong. I still love Arma3 and all of its features and continued development. I still bought the Jets DLC but it could be argued (and it would be true) that I was piling on a bad review because the flight model is a sore spot for me.
This is exactly where the expectation level and subsequent letdown comes from. BI has traditionally always treated anything that wasn’t the Player model, Guns, or the Map as a complete abstraction. Humvees do not have any sim elements to them at all. They do not drive like Humvees. Trucks do not handle like Trucks. In Arma 2 you could tail out slide the Bradley like a drift car in the Furious franchise. The Abrams has no controls that you can see and no gauges to view. Jets have always had unrealistic flight behavior. Even the VTOL platforms have rudimentary physics. You get the idea.
But then the Helo DLC was added and it gave Helos translational lift, vortex ring state, weight effects, gauges to view and so on. This was, and still is, a complete outlier in how BI implements its vehicles. It came about solely because of the effort put into Take On: Helicopters. In fact I distinctly remember when they announced Take On: Mars thinking I really wish it was Take On: Tanks instead! Anyway, the Helo work is a tease, no doubt, of what could be, but it’s a one off and not how BI approaches its roadmap.
As for the Jets DLC and @Fridge’s query as to “why do the jets at all?” I thought the same thing when I saw the roadmap video. Why not just do the systems and targeting work and roll it into a patch? The answer, as @near_blind always so eloquently puts it: Devs gotta eat. This is how it is done nowadays. Do the upgrade work for the systems that everyone will benefit from, and roll it in with some goodies that can be purchased as DLC. Stellaris just did this with it’s mega structures update as well - assets to purchase, but a patch as well to improve the game.
So I’ll preface this by saying I know this is harsh and I know this is biased, but jets in Arma are my Goku Button.
I just checked, I have 4,114 hours of play in Arma. I’ve been playing it literally since it came out, and at one point this included four to five hours a day, three times a week, with other people. 99.9% of the time it’s pilots thrashing into air defenses, trying to strafe and then frustrated they didn’t get the kill drive directly into the ground, flying into areas they shouldn’t because orbiting for more than two minutes was boring, etc. etc. Tens of hours spent trying to balance missions because players kept asking to fly, only to see them botched in the first three minutes because #yolo, and discarded never to be played again.
I have seen fixed wing air support used effectively exactly once. So from my position, if the majority of players can’t do it right with the aid of a crutch, how is kicking that crutch away going to help?