UWBuRn

It looks much more an A model. Anyway, cool_t, with the F-15 (i flow it for A LONG time in Lock On being part of a virtual squadron) i started using 6 AIM-120 and 2 AIM-9, then 4 AIM-120, 2 AIM-7 and 2 AIM-9 and now i'm with 2 AIM-120, 2 AIM-9 and 4 AIM-7. With the Sparrow you must keep the lock but is much more predictable than the Slammer, plus on some occasion the smoke trail can tell you if the missile is making something odd. I still use the Slammer when i have to run after i've launched it. I know, this might not be the best solution and the payload looks like a early '90 one but all considered is the one that suits better for me. At least until things get fixed. :smilewink:

No, not another thread about it, this has been discussed a million of times, we have to wait an answer from ED, DOT. Would be nice if this come out fast, but if they aren't telling us i think they some good reason about that. IMHO, asking is OK but reading always the same coomplaining about this is extremely boring even for common users, not even to tell about ED (i guess) that is already aware of the issue. Also, making such statements about weapons without even telling where thoose are coming from is totally useless plus all what was needed to be said on this argument has already been said at least twice.

Yes, got it, just to make clear that idea isn't that spreaded. :D

BTW, i was referring to the missiles fixes et similia, not to compatibility between FC and BS. AFAIK the compatibility between the two version was never took in consideration.

An official word about this point would be welcome for me too. Beside that i will get BS anyway, the care for the detail of the helo is really interesting, and seems also to be a nice platform for multiplayer. :)

Personally, after using Lock On since the demo, i almost don't use it anymore, but surely is useful for who get close to the sim for the first time. So i voted "I tend to say Yes. Sometimes I use it."

Sad news, 504th was really my fav server. :( But, as Pilotasso said, i hope they sort things out. :)

You didn't get the point. The mission was designed in this way obviously not to be realistic but just to offer to us an hard situation to handle, with enemies coming from all directions. :) And, of course, in regoular flying as far as i can i try to avoid getting that close to bandits and then being forced to an extremely risky missile dodging. ;) @Sp0nge:

The second video made by our group, recorded and edited by Altair. ;) We recorded this track "accidentally", and since it looked pretty good Altair pulled out a video from that. :) Enjoy: F-16 Invasion

I know this is a little OT, but speaking of the 169th server i have a couple of observation about the mission. I'm really not liking the way SAMs are placed. Basically i've stopped flying on 169th because you get shot without an active (sometimes if i'm at about 6000m or more even without launch warning at all) and you got no cognition of the detection range of the SAM. This is only encouraging flying extremely low to avoid BUKs and also has made pretty useless A2G planes since taking out SAMs under bridges is'nt all that fun (at least imho) but is unrealitic and also excessively hard (with the AGM-65 i.e i always lock something close to the SAM but not the SAM itself). Said this, i used to enjoy the old miniwar, but for me this is a NO GO. Just my 2 cents, anyway i hope this may help to improve the mission a little. :) PS Also last time i flew on 169th i've felt as red side SAM are much more effective than blue ones. :dunno:

Strike got it sorted out some day ago. Now we're facing another problem, getting to work more than one skin on the model. We've created two different bitmaps, placed them in temptexture and created a skin file. Everything seems to be ok but it still loads only the first skin, the one that has the bmp defined in the .lom file. The first entry that must be pointed out in the .skins file is the material that is assigned in 3ds or i am missing something? Argument 70 is defined in the .skins file but also should something be defined in 3ds about it? Really, i'm not figuring what we are missing now... :doh: Thanks in advance. :)

Thank you knellknell. Strike is also in touch with you on the Lockon Models Forum...

A friend of mine (i'm writing here for him since he doesn't speak english) is working on a 3d model for lock on, the MB339 and he needs some hints. The work is still not close to completition, anyway he wanted to try to put it in lock on and see how it looks like ingame. He managed to show the model ingame, even with some animation (overwritten the Su-33 model for testing) but now he's having a problem in applying the BMP textures on the model. We tried yesterday night to mess up with .skin file but probably there's something missing in the model. There'se somewhere a tutorial/reference on how apply textures for the models? Thanks in advance. :)

Nice reading, thank you for sharing! ;)

I had stuttering problems months ago with XP64 while having Cool'n'Quite enabled but only online. Never understood why only online but that forced me to disabled C'n'Q or to switch back to XP32. Give it a try ;)

Pilot and GG, both good idea, hope to see them in BS, since, as you said, time to implement them should be minimal. ;)

IMHO the fulcrum has thoose scores also because is VERY difficoult to spot in WVR combat. Combine it with the fact that BVR in lock on almost always degrades in WVR and you should have the reasons of thoose results... BTW Voted for both. For me the Flanker has it's own strong points (and i love the way it handles and the way it looks :D) but the Eagle generally performs better: in complicated enviroment both F-15 radar and rwr perform better for my taste, 27's ones degrade SA; also russian datalink isn't always that reilable for what i've seen, with low flying bandits often it loses contact. OT 29's radar is ridiculous, i often managed to shoot an ER at a fulcrum even before it was able to see me... :D

I would like to point out the only thing that disappoint me about this model: the plane is really hard to spot compared to the default model. It's difficult to see it just like the MiG-29, maybe the LOD need some tweaking. Other than that the model has reached an amazing detail and with the last release the mapping is almost perfect too! :thumbup:

Walmis, first of all thank you for the fantastic job done on this model! :thumbup: I've noticed that the centerline fuel tank is carried in a position that seems too arretrated to me. I would suggest you to use the same x coordinate used for the wing fuel tank pylons.

Got now the reply from simware and they are telling me that they can't substitute my CD... Who should i contact to get a backup for this CD? Can ED do something about this?

Mmm, dunno, maybe using a slower cd drive would produce less vibrations... also storing the disk in a normal cd case and not in the one that come with it (my JW case in fact has a very strong spindle) would help preventing the worn of the disk. Anyway that's why backup copy should exist. Where i live (Italy) selling software dnying the user the possibility of making one backup copy of the support where the software is stored is also illegal, anyway i doubt this will change ED policy about the SF copy protection. BTW, i've just mailed simw requesting a substitution, let's see what is their answer.

Yeah, i won't attemp anymore also because is useless; anyway at the moment it doesn't look like it will broke completely if readed again.

I'm having a problem with my FC CD... this morning i removed it from the CD drive and while i was placing it in its case i noticed a crack in the middle of the disk, starting from the hole. In fact i've already saw it something like a week ago but at the beginning i taught that was just a scratch, and being in the non written part of the CD i didn't cared very much. Unfortunately now the crack has grown and windows doesn't recognize the CD anymore (after i saw the lenght of the crack i tried to place the CD in the drive again to see if it was working again). I bought the CD on Simware, should i contact them for a substitution or should i get in touch with ED by mail? Thansk in advance. PS This is the nice part of StarForce, neglecting the users the right of making a backup copy in case of media support failure :cry:

Thank you for the input ;) I'll give that a try!

A friend of mine asked me if i can help him setting up a dedicated lomac server. I've looked for dedmac and it's quite clear how it works. Anyway i've didn't realized if there's a way to start the server on remote. On my lan i've tested with window$ remote desktop ( i think it's called in this way in english) but the game won't fire up, after the cd is checked it ctd with a dxrender.dll error even if the game runs if started locally. There's a way doing this exept starting lomac when the OS starts? How does 504th, 169th and other dediserver's owners handle this? TIA.