KILSEK

Hi all. I will help. The files you want are too large(7.6 mb) to upload to here, and too large for me to host. The only other option I can think of is Email. So, PM me with your address and I will hook you up. I hope you don't mind me asking, you do have broadband/ Dsl, anything better than dialup? -KILSEK

Hi all. I have been taking a break from mission/campaign creating and have been modifying files (structures, view configs) for particular results. I had a thought this morning and am curious about what it would take to accomplish it. I want to change an aircrafts side. In particular, I want to get the F-4E, the Mirage 2000, and both versions of the Tornado, from the countries that they are currently with to the U.S.A. side. I am betting that this can be done with the MEInit. I would think that if I can find the aircraft ID and find the counties ID all I would need to do is copy/paste one to the other. There is one question: Would the country icon(you know the one that identifies the aircraft as U.K., France, Germany, U.S.A.) automatically apply itself or would there need to be some more editing? I would greatly appreciate any help. Thanks, -KILSEK

Hi all and NY3D. Yes all measurements of distance and speed will be whichever you select. http://ts.nist.gov/ts/htdocs/230/235/appxc/appxc.htm -KILSEK

Hi all. 1) I have no idea how big 2 polygon's is, but would'nt the detail be ehhh? I just re-read your post and a flat structure reminds me of F4. I would like to have all the structures in LO/FC, 3D buildings look great and I like it when they collapse. 2) I got rid of the trees along time ago, around v1.0. I appreciate your suggestion of making this a LOMAN mod. I have made adjustments in the graphics and graphicssd files so I suppose I would have to either include them or write what I did in the readme. jason_peters, I believe is correct. Now that I lowered the number of structures I lowered the number in the 2 aforementioned files from 200/10000 to 100/10000. I will tell you that you do not wnat to change the second number at all. I increased it/decreased it and the results were lots of stuttering and pop-ups. I am finding out that I need to make adjustments in many areas to get what I am looking for. That is the reason I don't think this would make a good mod. What works and is acceptable to me may not be good for others. I will share what I am learning and pass it on. 3) I did delete the files I felt I could, barely and I mean just barely, live without ;) . Just make sure to make a back-up. I have used mine quite a few time experimenting with this. I would like to use LOMAN gfx config editor but I had a bad experience with it quite awhile back. It was probably my fault, but I still cannot get myself to even click on that tab. I did use it to install my one and only mod, Swingkid's and Alfa's Merzifon base. 4) As I said there is a list of the structures in the Bazar folder, it is called StructTable. It describes the building and gives the name of the file. I particularly liked having the stat called "life". That number helped me make decisions. FWIW, that life number really showed me that there is no lopsided advantage when it comes to Russia/NATO vehicles. -KILSEK

Hi all. Maybe it's the heat and humidity but I just had the scene from Dr. Strangelove go through my head. :D -KILSEK

Hi all. The drop-down weaps payload select menu is a outstanding idea. I am all for it. -KILSEK

Hi all. That is just one of the features that, IMO, makes LO/FC so great. You can customize it to play as simply or as hardcore as you see fit. -KILSEK

ED is user friendly. Hi all and ED. The list is right in front of me the whole time. If it was a snake it would have bit me. You folks at ED have your stuff together. BTW, I can see why it would be hard to type such a list for a post, there are 713 structures. But someone at ED did type it out and there it is, right in the Bazar folder labeled structuretable. Thanks, -KILSEK.

Read my post again. Hi all. Nope. -KILSEK

Hi all and Glowing_Amraam. I could feel the earth shaking sonic booms. The part where you go through the arch shaped rock and up the hill looks awesome. Great vid. Thanks, -KILSEK

Hi all. I have been jacking with this and have found out something. I can remove structures but instead of decreasing the total amout of structures, it just duplicates the available structures. I suppose this is tied into the graphics and graphicssd files where the number of structures per km/nm is set. This makes me think that maybe I can adjust those numbers and get a result. The problem: is there a ranking/hierarchy that says if I increase/decrease the structures number, it selects the building to add/remove? I was right about buildings and their names. The one I have selected, I took them and placed them in a folder. I swapped them with the ones left and thats when I realized about the numbers. I had alot of duplicate long buildings(probably apartments) but things like oil tanks, air traffic towers were gone. I think I may try removing them all and then add 1-5 at a time to see if I can figure out what is what, but man that is going to be a job. A list would sure be handy. I don't mean to bump this so soon after I posted because I know that it may take some time to get that list. I just wanted to post the findings in case others are interested. Thanks, -KILSEK

Hi all and 609_Recon. How did I enable it to fly? Goto the ME folder->MEInit. Open it using wordpad The easiest way is to type "humancockpit" using the find command and it will find all the AC you can enable. Change the no to yes and there you go. All will be available except fot the Su-25TM. Read the post above by Alfa. -KILSEK

Hi all and Alfa. Thanks. I renamed them and voila, a Su-25TM at my fingertips. Thank you very much. -KILSEK

Hi all. I am not sure where to post this (either here, mods, or 3d models), so if a mod can figure it out go ahead and move it. Anyway, I saw a mod out there, actually here by Hawg11, that removed some buildings to get better fps over cities. My problem with the mod is that IMHO it removed way too many buildings. It did however light that bulb above my head (thanks to Hawg11) and I went to the strucures->high folder and started manually removing buidings that again, IMHO, I could live without and would increase fps over the cities. Houses were the first to go, and then some others. Now, of course I made a backup and goodthing too, because I needed it. My question is this: Can we get a list of what buidings are what in that high folder? I would like to know what is what so that I can edit it. There are some words in there that I do understand, and others I don't. You can take a look yourself and see that some words are common while others are probably Russian. I also don't want to assume that if I look the word up online that the file is exactly that. Maybe the one that says CAFE_CRUSH is not what I am assuming it could be. Even though I would like to have all these buildings, I can tell you that I slow down to 7 fps when I fly over Sevastopol. I can live without houses as I am not going to set them up to be destroyed. On the other hand I am going to destroy every factory, smokestack, PP and anything that appears industrial. I know that i can make adjustments is other areas (vis. range, textures, scenes,) but I do not want to. It takes sacrificing a little from each to get a significant improvement. Whereas removing the houses, schools,cafes and others as I choose will give a significant boost while leaving my other settings alone. The problem with that is Med scenes removes just a touch too many while High has just too much. A list would be so helpful. So Is it possible to get a list of what the structures are? -KILSEK

Hi all. No I actually do not play F4, although it was one of the first sims I bought and played when I got my first PC. For me, using the keyboard simulates the buttons in a cockpit. Although with the following quote I can see that I will be using every regular key, shift+key, alt+key, and ctrl+key command out there to have all those commands mapped. So maybe, possibly ;) , a clickable pit would be useful. Yeah, now I'm down with that. Alot more buttons=alot more commands=alot more cool!!! That is absolutely true, and just as long as the A.I. cannot do it then I am good with that. You know this brings up a thought that should be a whole other topic. I am not going to hijack this thread but will start another about realism. You have to appreciate the efforts that all dev's(F4, LOMAC, Jane's) are putting forth trying to program something that folks will appreciate and want to buy. I want to say that I appreciate hardcore simmers efforts and feedback to get sims as real as possible. I just hope that dev's always keep it in mind to make it scalable so that folks can choose how easy/difficult thay want to play. -KILSEK

Hi all. I have been jacking around with this option and I have a few questions/comments. 1) What does this do exactly to the flight model of the particular aircraft you enabled? For instance, I enabled the F-117A. The stealth is there, it does not fly superfast, it does not turn on a dime, so is it flying like it is modeled in LO/FC? 2) I enabled the F-5E and i was able to climb to a altitude of 100K ft. I have pics posted at my site. I am thinking that if the jet is heavier than the Su-27 then it will fly slower, and if it is lighter it will fly faster. 3) I also posted a pic of the Su-25TM loading screen. It is "wierd", for lack of a better word. The Su-25TM has a loading screen available, yet it is not a flyable. What is even more "odd" is that when you enable it as a flyable you will not get it when the mission starts, in fact it will not appear at all. It does work when I have the A.I. fly it, but not me. This is odd as I can enable and fly all the other jets, but not the Su-25TM. My paranoidal delusions ;) tell me that ED had/have some plans for this bird but they are incomplete. Is this like the F-111/MiG-29k mod that you need to edit some files and Voila, Su-25TM at my fingertips? I found that if you enable the aircraft that only allow a single jet per flight the throttle does not respond well at all, it just bleeds off all the speed, loses altitude and finally crashes. Thats why I believe it has something to do with the weight of the Su-27. What are the pros and cons of Humancockpit=yes? Thanks, -KILSEK

Hi all. My choice is the Su-33. I does everything and it can haul ass. 1) Su-33 2) A-10A 3) F-15C 4) Su-25 5) MiG-29S 6) Su-25T 7) MiG-29A 8) Su-27 -KILSEK

Hi all. I do not care for clickable cockpits. ;) I believe in a clickable keyboard :) . I can program each key and then, as I have done, used alt+key to give dual commands. I still have the shift+key and the ctrl+key available for more commands That being said I am not against clickable cockpits either. What I am for is the option to chose how easy or how difficult I want to make my sim. Question: Would clickable cockpits allow for more commands than we already have? -KILSEK

Hi all and Han. Yes!!! Outstanding Sir. Thank you very much. -KILSEK

Hi all and rekoal. The Merzifon airbase mod by A. "SwingKid" Pavacic, J. "Alfa" Johansen -KILSEK

Hi all. I am absolutly thrilled with #2. That is exactly what I am saying. ED, you are absolutely on the right track. Modelling something so realistic and yet having the options to use it as simply, or as hard as you want it. I was hesitant about the KA-50 being the last vehicle for this series, but I do miss playing Gunship. I feel the way you folks at ED have created LO/FC, I can say that I have no problem believing that you will make 1.2 a spectacular hit. THIS MOTHER F'R IS OFF THE CHAIN!!! Hey Dmut, tell us more, I like a good bedtime story...LOL -KILSEK

Hi all and T.E.C.-Leader. LOL, no sweat, you're not being rude at all. If you don't mind I'd like to explain. I used the real radar when 1.01 came out and played on HL for awhile. I switched to easy because I like the total awareness it provides(as long as I switch between A2A/A2G) and allows me then focus on attacks and evasions. I mean I have gotten quite good at evading and I truely enjoy setting up 1vs4 fights, and now 1vs6/8. Going H2H with 4-8 Eagles/Su's/Falcons/Mig's and trying to survive is what I enjoy. I never knew the terms but I knew to pull the missile to the side, or push the nose over and build my speed so the at the last possisble moment I would pull back, launch flares/chaff get out of Dodge and set myself up for the next attack. I also like setting up attacks where I have to destroy something that is surrounded by so many SAM's/AAA that if it were a real mission they would be launching cruise missiles instead of sending the hero, me, to save the day. I feel that easy radar allows me to focus on the action, which is the juice for me. I apologize for the way this may come out, but before anyone says go back to Ace Combat, I want to say that I have always wanted something that has the action of AC with the aircraft/vehicles/weapons that are modelled to be as realistic as possible. You did not need flares/chaff in AC. The Hog in AC flew at a speed of 700mph. The Eagle flew at 2100 mph. It was a most unrealistic flight game and I wanted more. I got F4 when I got my first PC and it would crash everytime I would play, I wanted more. LO/FC gives me the exactly what I have always wanted, :D and all I want now are the bugs for the easy radar fixed ;) . As I said here recently, LO/FC is, for me, the greatest game/sim ever. ED has my full support, They are on the right track and have their stuff together. I apologize for repeating this, I just hope that they treat the easy radar bugs just as they would treat others bugs found in LO/FC. I maybe the only one speaking about easy radar, but I do not believe that I am the only one using it. Thanks, -KILSEK

Hi all. S! and "God Save the Queen" -KILSEK

Hi all and ED. I just found a big bug. Using the easy radar I cannot lock onto any static targets. I know to set it as a target and yet I cannot get any kind of lock at all on them. I can lock onto enemy aircraft with and without designating them as targets. I can lock onto enemy ground vehicles with and without designating them as targets. I cannot lock on enemy static objects with or without designating them as targets. This includes bridges that are already on the map and includes also any static objects placed on the map using the Mission Editor. I have found that if I use the autolock , nearest, center, previous, next, aircraft/surface target commands, I can lock onto them and use my weaps. Maybe you could implement an option to "autolock onto the next, nearest, previous center, static target". I found this out by jacking around with the humancockpit-yes option. Today I enable the F-117A and loaded 2 GBU-27's. We all know that those are laser-guided bombs. I placed a KUB missile site on the map. I took off and climbed to altitude, hit the key to turn on the laser, selected a vehicle in the group and when the launch authorized came up I released the weapon, the GBU hit the selected vehicle. I was so excited, I then tried to destroy a bridge using the GBU's and the laser would not lock. I then tried to destroy the bridge using and A-10, and then realized that even though I mark it as a target and get the diamond to appear on the bridge, I cannot lock onto it. That's when I decided to try other static objects, both those already on the map like bridges, and those added on using the Mission Editor. None of the objects allow me to lock onto them. I again ask that you take this serious and please address this issue, if it is not to late. Thanks ED. -KILSEK BTW, I am not a pilot, and have never flown a F-117A, but it does work and behave like I felt it should. I does not turn on a dime and the stealth does work. I evaded 2 missiles (missile effectiveness=100%)launched at me from the KUB site with a slight evasive movement, well, I also used 2 flares/chaff. Thanks, -KILSEK

Hi all. ED. If there is still some time can you look into fixing an easy radar bug. In my sig where I post my screen shots there are some new ones showing that the F-15's radar has a max range limit of 40 miles/nm. The A-10A can go out to 640 mi/nm. the MiG's and Su's all go to 160 mi/nm. If there is still some time can you fix it to where it is at least equal to the MiG's and Su's. I would not take it bad if you lowered the A-10A's down to 160 mi/nm. Please take this as a serious request and do your best to fix it. Thanks, -KILSEK