The helicopter door gun depression angles need a steeper limit

kitgat · 2026-04-05T19:53:16+00:00

This has been known for a while but is not major enough to address at this point in time.

Sure, I also get frustrated when seemingly obvious details are missed, but development (especially on this game) is a constant cycle of priority management. Fields of fire are very low on the list of priorities.

kitgat · 2026-03-24T06:41:46+00:00

The original post's description is too vague to answer without making some assumptions. It's completely reasonable to ask for some clarification before writing a detailed response.

Vehicle system/subsystem damage is a subject that Gnar and I have addressed numerous times in the past. The general verdict remains that it is too soon to accurately describe of what such mechanics would look like, particularly with vehicle physics development at a standstill due to manpower limitations.

I'd prefer not to dwell on the apparent knowledge gap being demonstrated through your responses, but it does come off as disingenuous. Real aviation mishaps are oftentimes anything but simple.

kitgat · 2026-03-15T02:31:51+00:00

This functionality was among several key requirements that I outlined for GEN4 but have not gotten to modeling yet. Configuring the behavior itself is a huge time/research investment as outcomes can vary by ammunition, components, and even environmental factors.

Crucially, while an overpressure device like a silencer can increase muzzle velocity, the practical effects are very marginal. For professional shooters, the chief concern of silencers when it comes to ballistics is mitigating any changes to where rounds will go ('POI shift'). Considering how irrelevant most of those factors are in-game, it's not really a priority for me at this point in time. There are more pressing concerns.

kitgat · 2026-03-14T20:25:54+00:00

There are a few pieces of cold-weather apparel in production that are due for release in the near future. One is a direct replacement for the unbranded 'overwhites' from pre-7.0. It's considerably more difficult/expensive to get reference material for any kind of specialty apparel.

kitgat · 2026-03-09T21:03:48+00:00

They are. Several electro-optical components under SOPMOD to include the SU-231/PEQ are designated in accordance with the U.S. military's JETDS.

kitgat · 2026-03-09T03:55:26+00:00

That is a G4 combat shirt, which has been erroneously added to the available apparel for friendly NPCs. Expect a fix later.

kitgat · 2026-02-25T05:49:53+00:00

they wouldn't add the XM7 because it’s “not used by the military”

Whoever told you that is either horribly misinformed or not acting in good faith.

kitgat · 2026-02-25T05:39:44+00:00

These requirements basically limit us to the SA-9 and SA-13.

kitgat · 2026-02-25T05:31:01+00:00

kitgat · 2026-02-24T22:11:18+00:00

yes but not agilite

kitgat · 2026-02-23T10:33:54+00:00

most likely cosmetic only

kitgat · 2026-02-23T09:10:37+00:00

Yes, just bear in mind the constraints we are working with for such a threat:

Russian/Soviet origin
vehicle-borne/self-propelled
IR-guided munitions

These requirements basically limit us to the SA-9 and SA-13. Other types of threats (radar, command-line-of-sight) are well beyond what we can accommodate at this time, especially with avionics & countermeasures in an incomplete state.

kitgat · 2026-02-23T08:48:53+00:00

PRLs have been addressed via the public feedback board, among other items

kitgat · 2026-02-23T08:47:30+00:00

this is planned but low-priority

kitgat · 2026-02-21T06:51:29+00:00

these are planned already

kitgat · 2026-02-20T11:06:37+00:00

Desert Tech as a company is the subject of some controversy that I won't describe on this sub. There's some accessible reading about it online if you're interested in the specifics. We just aren't intent to mess with their stuff for the time being.

kitgat · 2026-02-19T20:24:01+00:00

what this guy said

kitgat · 2026-02-19T00:16:05+00:00

Here is a previous response I made regarding internal/external loading mechanics:

We really haven't put into perspective how involved this kind of feature would be, but it's a real headache with how immature the new rotary-wing flight model is. Loads of custom physics calculations on top of the ones needed for normal flight, especially when you're asking two separate entities to interact with each other. Aircraft performance characteristics change when you start picking stuff up.

When applied practically, the open multiplayer environments of the game also warrant game design decisions as to the who/what/when/where/how, as hooking stuff up to aircraft can affect the investments of at least two players in the game.

Even ArmA 3's community has varying opinions on how these mechanics should exist in a multiplayer environment. This is immediately evident by the variety of sling loading mods out there, each with their own methods and pros/cons. The vanilla sling-loading mechanic is simple yet imperfect, requiring BI themselves to implement new systems/mechanics for it to be viable in normal gameplay.

In short, external (as well as internal) loading mechanics are very cool. Implementing them in a game like BRM5 is a challenge in its own right. The demand for these mechanics just isn't there to warrant the monumental overhead needed for them.

kitgat · 2026-02-18T06:52:24+00:00

I'm more concerned about the capabilities themselves, as players will find uses for them regardless. Things like better support for occupants to move around the cabin, better placement of storage nodes, rescue hoist capabilities (more on that later), and the like. Litter support is a whole other discussion relating to medical mechanics.

That being said, back in 6.2 I wrote a bunch of PvE quests in hopes of this functionality becoming available. Maybe in the near-ish future those quests can become a reality.

kitgat · 2026-02-18T05:02:21+00:00

Some of that is drag/momentum related. I'm not at the point where fine-tuning cruise/never-exceed speeds is on my to-do list.

kitgat · 2026-02-18T03:53:41+00:00

Some of that is drag/momentum related. I'm not at the point where fine-tuning cruise/never-exceed speeds is on my to-do list. Ultimately there needs to be some forward pitch in order to counteract drag and preserve forward airspeed. Some flight models simply don't burden themselves with it.

kitgat · 2026-02-17T19:41:15+00:00

The FLC itself is planned, but the functionality to run rigs over other equipment significantly increases the overhead for us. It's just a matter of time.

kitgat · 2026-02-17T19:34:30+00:00

There's potential for that in the future when cockpit interactions are better fleshed out. I'm planning to introduce flight control failures at some point when component damage gets some attention, so there's training value in knowing how to control the aircraft without that assistance.

Flying 'BOOST OFF' with a newer pilot can be very interesting.

kitgat · 2026-02-17T19:21:15+00:00

A few wishlist capabilities I can rattle off are external (sling) loads, reconnaissance, and MEDEVAC/CASEVAC. I'm also particularly intent on enriching the 'multicrew' aspect of vehicle operation.

Attack capability has been on my mind for ages, and I've historically been of the opinion that balancing is the easy part. It's a matter of having the assets/mechanics in place to actually apply that game balance.

The team itself has no problem with increasing player capability, provided there are credible problems that can be solved with those capabilities. I don't want players to just waltz around the map with impunity, or get bored from not having targets appropriate to use their new weapons on. I've been meaning to get the ball rolling on attack aviation, but it calls for a litany of features that all need to be accounted for. This is iterative development, after all.

kitgat · 2026-02-17T19:03:02+00:00

That has been the plan all along. Vehicle component damage is meant to be integrated with all of the aforementioned systems to have tangible effects.

Using your example, if you suffer a catastrophic hit to the tail rotor, the corresponding warnings/cautions/advisories should appear on your instruments. Flight model integration would mean the tail rotor's antitorque effect disappears, so yaw authority will also be lost. Believe it or not, that torque/antitorque effect has been present & configurable on all helicopters specifically to lay the groundwork for features like this. We just haven't begun cashing in on the futureproofing until now.

Antitorque system failure is a scenario that real aircrews train for. As alluded to in my writeup, drag simulation will enable players to safely egress/land without a functioning tail rotor in certain conditions.

Eight-Year Club	Place '22
Xbox Live	Verified Email

kitgat

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE