Boneski

http://www.swannysmodels.com/Hokum.html ?? http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&safe=off&q=russian+Kamov+Ka-50+Hokum+helicopter+&um=1&sa=N&tab=wi??

That's the Author!! Thanks again! -Bones

Hey guys ... do any of you have a link to the Lock On Videos made a few years back by the French Pilot screen name Turgor or something like that. That may not be his / her Callsign. But he or she made one of the sickest Lock On Videos eve!! Maybe the greatest of all time. The Flying and precision were amazing! The image that sicks out was that the super imposed Hud data over the Jet in A zoom climb.. Also there were Cut scenes with the Flanker flying under a bridge... after a hard recovery from a dive... Great video... It would be cool to see it again! Thanks for the Help -Bones:pilotfly:

Well then... nothing like a little egg on the face! -Bones

Oh really? What makes it a step backwards? It seems to be an enhanced version of a old classic... Are the graphics 4 colour now versus 16 mil. Does it have sound Yet? Or will that come in a patched version? Yeah the Hind dropping troops is a clear step backwards... The original allowed you to drop off a troops and FedEx Cargo. Again.. Spot on Bro... Clearly a step backwards. Thanks for the insight! And before anyone gets bent... just picking on ya.... :) Your opinion is yours! -Bones

Height, Weight and Health are very important when being considered for a combat aviation slot... Air forces around the world have different standards so this post is not intended to be a matter of fact. First you have to check your country's Air force regs and Med reqs. When being "fitted" to a type. Many factors such torso and leg length are very important. If you are over 6 feet tall and you carry your height in your torso.. the Head clearance between your head and canopy is critical. If you carry your height in your legs then leg clearance is critical. You don’t want your body in contact with items in the cockpit. If you are wider you don’t want you arms hitting the rails… Health: Fat with High Blood pressure will get you fitted to the Met Office or some other desk job in flight operations here in the states. Make no mistake, you can have a little extra chunk on you… but it has to be with in the BMI regs. Also here in the states… BMI (Body Mass Index) is a VERY important consideration for a combat aviation slot. Just remember that the goal is to have you survive ejection. If your legs are too long they may make contact with the jet when you egress via the hot rocket!! If you are too heavy you may break your back during the rocket motor burn... Factors like that... You can size out that's for sure. High Blood pressure will ground you! Women have the best body types of fighters.... Smaller Lighter and Feistier!! So if you are a bigger / taller then avg guy. Check with your flying force. Talk to the squadron’s flight doctor. They have all the regs as well and other information including things that can be waived. If you want to fly… there is nothing you can do about height… but there is plenty you can do about weight if that’s a problem.. Good Luck! -Bones

If you are asking if you start the game with the game time set to 07:00 H and let it run until 21:00H, then Yes.. you will see real time transitions from Morning passing through Noon Passing Through Dusk Passing to Night. Real Time Shadows - Real Time Sky. When you change the Day var you will see the transitions shift like they should for that Julian date for the part of the world the game is simulating.

Please keep in mind that your personal experience will be made to be a real as you like it... meaning you set the standards as you see fit. You will have the perfect game in regards to having it do what you want it to do. As for online play. There would be no advantage since the files from the clients and server would be compared to the “Default Standard”… This Check would ensure that any advantages would be with in the standards set by the developers. Things like Radar, G, and power would use a simple Advantage Switch. So if published data says that the Radar in the 15 has and advantage over The Radar in the 29s. Then a simple switch will make sure that is the case when comparing the files. Same with missiles and other Variables. The game will use Logic to create your new multiplayer experience. Any "Cheats" as you guys call them would be kept in check. But your perception of what is realistic will be preserved. The Magic is in the details of how the comparison works... So yes your online play will be different from your Solo play... But that's why you play online right? You are looking for something different…. You want to see that image that represents a bad guy being control by the unpredictable human versus the limited yet precise function executing AI.. correct? Keep in mind… Your PC game will never contain how this stuff works in real life. Your game is not a systems simulation. Nor do you have the cpu cycles needed to do the complex physic. Real combat is about Life and Death… Your $35 Euro game will not have the blue prints to the farm so to speak! So the next best thing is sorta what you have already but people have a perception that things are broken. Why not give you the ability to tweak things to your liking… This should help some enjoy the game even more. Based on comments seen in this and many flight gaming forums. If you read something or are told something by someone that you feel is an authority on the subject matter… plug into your game… and enjoy. When you play with others… Things will be compared giving you the best of both worlds… That’s the logic behind this concept. Thanks for reading. .

A lot of users are not happy with the way things work in Lock On and pretty much any other flight combat game if it fails to live up to what is perceived by the users as realistic even if it is unrealistic to expect ultra high levels of realism from a Consumer based game. With that said, would you accept a completely customizable experience? Meaning that, if you don't like the way the Aim 120 or R 27 is represented in the game. You can change the data tables so that the game represents what you feel is more realistic? Mods could be made to other areas of the game where user perceived inaccuracies exist as well. Much the ay users are able to paint the model skins… the user can make changes to certain data sets to have the game better represent the user’s idea of realism. For the sake of this discussion… Weapon systems and Aircraft performance tables will be the limits of the mods. In Solo play these values are not challenged by the game. If you want an R60 to fly 600km and 9000ms then so be it. It’s your experience. Please keep in mind. The Mods have to fit with in the programming limits of the application. So limits will exist. How would you feel if had complete access to some of these parameters that would allow you to fix the game to your liking? In the case of Multiplayer the game would force the user to either use a standard config file or allow the users that connect to use their own client side file or import and use the server side file. These would be options. Meaning the server could not force the user to use the server side only file. Before anyone brings up "cheating", please keep in mind that most military training sims work this way. Data is plugged in to represent the latest system or modded system. But for the sake of entertainment, the game would compare the user's config file with the servers config file to insure the values are with in the preset limits of the default file.. If it is found that the files are too far off from the standards set buy the game's internal file. The game will "blend" the files to give each user and experience that matches as close as possible the best of both files.. So things like a 600km range R60 would not exist. But the approximation to each users mods will mixed with the sever /host mods. Would the gaming community accept such a compromise?

Re-read the post bro. Never said that. If you are going to come at me. Come correct.

These forums are good. This is a great place to get official information from the developers about their product line. Also this is a great place to get help from other customers of the game that have run into problems before and have solutions that work. You can't ask for much more. People misuse forums and they mutate into places for the unhappy... Even if sections of the forum are setup for people to vent... some how negetive threads get mixed up into the general threads. Why because people are stupid. They feel the need to smash up the place because they are not happy. But that's just the nature of the net.

Good... It seemed for a sec that you all were serious with threats about gaming "squads" leaving the community and other silly things... Behavior not consistent with grown men . Thanks for clearing that up Bro....

You guys are kidding right?

Bro take it easy.... and don't worry about what I do. Just have fun playing your sim.

Hey D, Solo play has a lot to do with it. Not worth explaining why. You just have to be there when a program is in early lifecycle…. The other point is that you are Not playing realistically... That can be said without even playing the game with you... You may think you are… and that’s all that matters. Hey T, no worries... it's the nature of posting on the net. Noting bad is meant by the blanket statements. People want improvements... and they may or may not come. Nothings wrong with pointing out flaws, issues, and the other things. Enjoy the game they way that wroks for you. Gotta Have more Cowbell!

Hey G, As for hardcore data.... That's not my bag... But if that statement is incorrect then the gang should meet at the Eagle Dynamics Run servers and have some multi player fun with thousands of other owners.... Sure it's clear that you guys want much more then a winning F15... the point of the retort has been that it would not matter much if the missiles/ecm were tweaked... since it is not balance you guys are asking for. It's all good... These post are not about proof... they are just observations of observations... ;)

Hey G, The statement is based on facts. It has a lot to do with many things. The single player experience is key to this type of game's success. If not then there would not be any AI. The Multiplayer is an option that is there… It works pretty well. Based on all of the formation demos… it works really well! My Friend... Information is Disinformation.... The fact that no one on these boards can say what they want or what the problem is speaks volumes... So far all that has been said is that the F-15 should beat the Flanker. Okay… fair enough. The quick fix would be to set the Sliders for the AI down a notch and if you are playing with human players, have them Fly using the proper tactics that will let you win. That's what happens at Flag.... Look... If the developers put out a read me stating that the game is working like it should based on the information they have... I think some of you guys would pass out and die from outrage at such a statement... LOL!

Dude... most people play against the AI. This program is not marketed as a Massively Multi-Player Application. The game has to first be Fun for the solo player which makes up the Bulk of the game's owners...:pilotfly:

See Rugg there you go... how about you coming to the Air Force and fly the Eagle... Then you will see how pointless all this really is. I will even help you put your package together.... Hub is spot on. C Skies is no different then Lock on in the fact that it's a game. (yes they are different since they focus on different markets) With that said, you would be better off talking about Both games as games then trying to relate Lock on to Real Air combat. The developers will tell you the same thing... Guys for all of that stuff to work.... Lock On will need to be re-written from the ground up as a Air War Simulation. So the Advantages that Hub points out can be balanced against other systems. Like SAMS, Patrols. etc.... ALSO, Most of you guys are tying to Fly Blue on Blue style tactics... Without all of the support that Blue would have... Mainly other flights and Datalinks etc. ALSO Time Frame is important... Today's Viper is much different then the Viper circa 1995... So when you read the latest and greatest tactic in a glossy tech rag... Lock on does not have the stuff to support that... Red Air tactics are the most under disccused topic on these boards. Why because the point is moot... Most of you don't know how other Air Forces operate. How would you unless you are briefed about it?? So Rugg don't diss Hub because you want to be or wanted to be in the Air force... Join up if you are not too old and Step Into The Blue!!!!!! With your skills, kills and game knowledge, I'm sure you will make the F-15 Class of 2010. Heck you might even get 22's if you have good Bow hunting skills!:smartass: But let the game be the game man! If you are chasing your dream... then do that... But this box pc sim should not be your gateway to Valhalla... :(

So you want this realism to be limited to 1 v 1 or multi contact / multi ship engagement? How will you make one part of the game ultra "realistic" without re-writing the application? It's the issue that has been following sim development for a long time. To have realism to a high degree.. the very core of the programs has to support it from top to bottom. Also the other problem is that user defined "Realistic Tactics" are really not realistic... Lock on does not support the concept of the Airwar very well. It's more of a 1 v 1 type of sim... AI or Human vs Human. It shines in the area of ACM and BFM. Realistic BVR is hard to do in a sim. But your point is understood... Good luck! One day we will have to fly online… it would be nice to see how realistic your flying is... :joystick::pilotfly: 07-05-2007, 11:56 AM #133 D-Scythe vbmenu_register("postmenu_349666", true); ED Testers Team Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 2,064 Reputation: 9 Wow... how did that happen....??? Any way D... YOu are not flying an 15 vs and Su27... You are playing a game that represents what it might be like... cut it some slack bro... The problem you guys are running into is that first you guys grow a single eyebrow and engage no matter the odds... You fly nose on and wait for the HUD to que you and you fire. That is not a wise tactic or realistic tactic... So even if the developers "fix" the missiles to your liking it will matter not... It seems like you are asking for the "So easy that a Caveman can do it" attack / engagement profile... with missiles. You fire them and you hit it and win it. That could be done for sure. But single ship nose hot engagements are things that don't really happen all that often in real life bro... no matter how big your sticks are... you are asking for a jacked up outcome...

RESPECT!!!!!!!! (I an ALi G Voice)!:pilotfly: G Money... not saying that all... If they "fix" it they will want support documentation to back up the change. Rags that say this or that will not rise to the standard. So if the Russian team has docs in Russia that say the way it is now is correct then what? Should they change it because the fans thinks it's wrong? Again it is not clear what fans want.... There has been posted all sorts of fun data about the western systems.... that has not been the case for the Russian systems on the EN forums.... Post up some charts about the Russian systems if you have them... maybe that can better explain what the code in the game is doing... Question: Would the fans accept a more balanced outcome? Meaning that you change the missile code for both teams to be the same in their respective performance would that be acceptable? Giving no user has an advantage over the other? Forcing the user to employ good tactics... This would make for fair game play.... putting victory in the hands of the better user. So is it fair game play you guys want... YOda? Or do you want as said in the post above to have the code for the F15 have an advantage over everything else in the game. Clear that up will you... thanks! G the tone of the post should not be taken to have any negativity....

Guys.... The point is still being missed here. And that is context. Words like flight dynamics and seeker performance, charts, graphs.... have no place in this discussion... There are no "dynamics" there is no "seeker" in the physical sense. When you start to realize that (clearly some of you do) you will have the proper context for a logical discussion of the problem that might exist. What is there, are lines of code... code that can change how the game presents data to you the player... Your missile, it is safe to say are nothing more then C++ function/methods. There may exist stuff called AirMissiles() as well as another method call MisData()… there may even be a method called AA_Seeker() that contains code on how all the missiles operate in this game. It is doubtful there is a method for each missile represented in the game. So changing the code that controls the thing you call the Aim120 may affect all the missiles in the game… breaking everything. So maybe this programmed behavior was a compromise to insure everything else work well. Bottom line is that this is a well written Object Oriented program, not Seekers, RCS, and Flight Dynamics. Those things do not apply here. You guys will never get what you want if you continue to fail to understand the context you are working in. You are not in a cockpit. You are not and Aerospace Athlete You are not flying and fighting the Jet. You are playing a game/simulation or whatever makes you happy. You have to understand that and speak to the situation in that context. Also keep in mind something else... The people that build these applications called flight sims are some of the smartest people in the industry. Not only are they smart. They want to build the best product they can. They are fans for the genre.... They are dreamers and doe’s just like you. They know the shortcomings of their applications. They know why they made compromises to portions of the application. You the fans are not telling them anything new that they don’t already know. Again you have to understand the context. You the player, you want the PERFECT product... they, the people with the know how can only build a better product. Based on what they know about the topic and with in the boundaries of computer programming. Lock on represents that concept very well. Black shark and future titles from this group and others will build on the success and failures of past products. Each iteration and release better then the one before. Fans and users will need to compromise and accept what they have and try to enjoy it the best they can. The laws of Physics are bound by what your computer can do. You have to accept that. When you were a kid you use to use your imagination to get you through. Now that you are an adult you are too lazy or too stubborn to do it. That’s unfortunate. If you play the game worrying that what you are doing or using is not exactly like the stuff a million dollar trained fighter pilot is using… you are restricting yourself from having a good time…. Having worked continuously with people in this industry you get to see how much they love this genre. They are fans just like you. They have a goal for their products that go far beyond profit making. The sad part is that Fans that buy these products verbally trash them without understanding what they are talking about. Not that that is going on in this thread. But the context of the problem is wrong and shows a lack of understanding despite the vast knowledge of real world ideas displayed in this thread and others. Good luck with your campaign to bring change to the missile code... The developers are no doubt listening!!

But What if that is how it really is?

Not at all . If you want the game fixed to make you happy... you have to clearly express what that level of happiness is... It seems for most that level is an aviation career in a box... thats going to be tuff for any developer to pull off. Missile data is classified. Trust me. You won't get too much info outside of the briefing room.... But reading the tread starters post he feels that His missiles are under powered and the other teams missiles are over powered... What would make him happpy? Balance? Winning out right. What? Whos said that this is not the way things really are>?? His missiles need to have the advantage is what it sounds like he is saying. He was flying a missile truck and feels like he should have won... The point about ranges is that he does not know the facts... so should the game be altered to fix the F-15 so that it can be the super jet ? What fun would it be to fly agaist ? The programmers can program balance. It seems that the advantage is programmed the wrong way for this guy. b\ The problem is that with out first hand facts it's crazy to customize the game for a small group of vocal users... that's all... The guys wants better missile... while this guy wants better taxi lights on the airfield.. what's more important? Maybe one day a sim will come out where the users can mode the database tables and the user can tweak the game to their liking. It would be too sweet if the tables controlling taxi lights could be changed... that would make this sim user so very happy.

Here is the problem with all of this... and it's going to sound harsh. 1) None of you know what is going on. It's just that simple. 2) Most of you have never been in a fighter jet or even a true mil spec sim. 3) Most of you have never written a line of Code regarding Air combat simulations. 4) Most of you are clueless about how to employ a weapons system. So all this technical rubbish about what is not right with this program is just pure BS. Hate to say it like that . But it's true. You can't compare this program to the real world because a program is not bound by any laws regarding the real world. It would be so nice if people would adhere to that standard as tightly as they adhere to their so called standards of realism. Also Missile data is classified. Most games are working with published data from the 60's and 70's that states what a system can do. Mix that with published data on what countermeasure can do and you have just about every consumer level air combat program that has hit the market. It's all guess work. The thread starter is pissed and want's an "issue" to be addressed... The problem was not the missiles...It was the unrealistic way the game was played... Him vs the world... How realistic is that. Bug fixes will never address that issue. SOrry. :(