Woodstock

Hey Gambit, If you had taken the time to dig a li´l deeper into the game and especially into this forum you could have completely saved yourself this thread. First, people here can´t be as easily provoked as the F4 branch. We all know that neither LOMAC nor Falcon are the sims we wish we had, that the combination of the bright sides of the two would be a great evolution. It makes no sense to compare F4 to LO since they specialize in different aspects and therefore can´t be objectively judged against each other. Everyone has to determine for himself which sim´s highlights he prefers. You sound like someone who had just a very superficial look at LO and therefore by your statements you simply qualify as a troll. I´m not going to point out all the qualities of LO to you apart from the graphics since I don´t care if you discover them or not. I just hope you bought the game and didn´t judge it by it´s demo thus supporting us and ED by funding their future. Thank you, bye-bye.

Hey Groove, If you wanna use LO as a benchmark, get used to compare 8 fps with 7 fps...:D ...over busy battlefields, that is... This game will defy any hardware for quite some more time.

Nice title... - where´s the rest?!

No, PL´s just curious himself... - I got his message again, thanx for that. After getting some negaive replies from the LO team, we still rely upon your tests, Scotty!

:icon_excl ATTENTION:icon_excl Someone called "PL" wrote me an e-mail "Re: Multiple Monitors in LockOn". Unfortunately the mail got lost in the spam filters and couldn´t be opened.:confused: The filter settings have been changed. Whoever "PL" is, please please send the mail one more time! Thanx in advance!

The existence of accompanying TS servers with IP and passwords is clearly visibly announced in the dedi-server descriptions in Hyperlobby. Headsets are a very cheap investment compared to the whole new online flying experience in-game voice-comms offer. None of our squad´s members are native english speakers, yet we don´t mind babbling right away. The common language is rather brevities and R/T than plain English, and those are quite easy to learn. Back on topic, please! Anyone want to contribute to the questions I posted?

LOOOOOOOL Yes, ´seen my share of that... Good reason to dig into the subject, n´est-ce pas?

Hi Squadronmembers and -leaders! I am currently translating non-classified parts our vJaBoG32-Wing-Manual (ca. 160 pages) into english and maybe parts of it will be available to the community some day. Those parts mainly deal with brevity-codes and departure-/arrival-R/T-procedures for controlled and uncontrolled airbases. For the brevity part there won´t be much new to share since I´m shure you all know the relevant articles at SimHQ and this list: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/90-38/fm_90-38_brevity.pdf But I am curious to find out how other large squadrons handle the radio calls for coordination of multiple flights/aircraft during departure and arrival phases of their training and squadwar missions. On good days we experienced up to 20 pilots who, solo or in formations, were using the taxiways, runways and traffic patterns of our homeplate at the same time. We found that everything went much more organized once everyone used standardized R/T calls, no matter if there was a tower controller on duty or not. How do others handle non-tactical radio procedures? Is there already a common standard in the community that I am not aware of? Who knows LO- or milflightsim-specific links to articles related to the subject? Who is willing to share their squadron procedures with the community? I´m asking to get a feeling for what the subject matters to you and how you handle it. It´s always great to fly mixed-squadron missions like in the late CAW and to know what the other guys are talking about on the radio. S! @ll, Woody:D

Many thanx in advance, Scotty! Good that you have the neccessary hardware to hand to test it. I need to know before making the appropriate investments. Please remember that it´s about 3 monitors driven by only TWO graphic cards. Looking forward to your results! Anyone else got something to tell me about this? - Maybe someone who programmed dual and triple monitor support into LO?

*bump* Trees not "working" in 1.11 (see above). Any suggestions for now or news about tree behaviour in future releases?

You are cordially invited to use our Public-TS-Server based in Germany. IP: 83.133.48.78:8868 Password: tornado12

*bump* HELP:icon_excl

I´d rather even encourage you to buy both. Both are real bargains since from both you get not hours but years:icon_excl of deep, immersive gaming pleasure. They really shine when it comes to longevity. Both specialize in certain areas of military flightsimming as you already read often enough. Having them both you can choose between them on a daily basis according to what mood you´re in. Futhermore, the two are the ONLY two credible approaches to contemporary mil-fighterjet-simming since 1998! Supporting the neglected genre in general by spending a total amount of $70 for both sims would be a wise idea if you like those games and wish to see anything new in the future...

Wilco, thanks for the quick replies! EDIT: tested it thoroughly with "collidable = true" for both trees and forests in SP and MP. No collisions other than with the ground or buildings happened...:D :( :confused: Seems like this worked only for the 1.0 demo and maybe earlier versions.

Hi folks, I have a pretty dedicated question on this topic. After having read I guess almost everything on multi monitor support in flight simulators, I ran across the ability of LockOn to use this feature with a Matrox Parhelia Card on three monitors simultaneously. Now that this graphic card is not a high end one, so I envisioned the posibility (and a strong wish as well) to run LockOn on a computer with two graphic cards on three TFTs (2xPCIe or mixed 1xAGP+1xPCIe) under Windows XP span mode (w/ latest nvidia drivers). I could already test LockOn using two monitors with a single GF6800GT in span mode and it worked perfectly. Even more, LockOn´s graphic options showed me dual as well as *triple* monitor resolutions though there were only two monitors connected on a single graphics card. To melt it down to the point finally my question: Does the LockOn engine support triple monitors using two graphic cards? Thanks for any contributions on this subject and kindest regards. Yours, JaBoG32_Woodstock

Oh yes! Please tell me that it takes only a setting value change to make trees real obstacles! Please, please, please someone tell me which setting in which config needs to be changed!!!

I see your point, but from a user´s point of view I have to say: I am in the business of using software for radars, comms and ATC systems for quite some years now and the last time we were bound to get an update for our crapy RDPS at Munich that patch was delayed until further notice since it downed the whole Frankfurt (Langen) Center after install there. Sometimes sh** remains just that, no matter if you change colour, smell or flavour... But no need to dig further into this. Cheers, m8!

I´m interested in the "tree issue" as well. For Black Shark to be a credible copter sim trees should provide both visual cover and serious obstacles. The current state of trees not having a collision model is already annoying for CAS pilots, for the copter to come this detail would spoil the game to a large extent. Has this issue already been discussed elsewhere in this forum? Did ED already comment on it? If not, I would like ask the developers if they will do something about the trees in 1.2?

1. Once you played LO with TIR, you will never want to go back. Consciousness-expanding in any respect! 2. The TIR axis are scalable. You can program an only few degree head movement to be a 100° view movement ingame. 3. There are functions for in-game enable/disable and re-center. You can map those to whatever keys you don´t need for the game.

Maybe a buggy landing light? Have you tried toggling?

I wonder what makes more sense: Reworking a code that 2 years after its release still doesn´t run on any existing system in full detail and with lowered detail still makes a $4000.- system go down to single-digit fps over a lively battlefield. Code that might not even have found the hardware to run smoothly by the day LO´s successor is released. Or writing something new from scratch and avoiding mistakes made.

I concluded that from someone else stating a Mav warhead alone is heavier than a whole Hellfire missile. I live by the rule "bigger gun, bigger boom, bigger hole".:D New fashions like SDMs make me yawn...;) ...and now don´t anyone dare to go further OT by commenting on SDMs!:rolleyes: I love this forum!:icon_jook

Ah, rgr, thanks! So the A-10 can detect targets designated by Apaches, Kiowas, SpecOps and stuff and launch LGMs, LGBs, Laser-Mavs and stuff at them. That would mean it also could employ laser-Hellfires. Theoretically - if it could carry them and if they were integrated in weapon avionics... But that´s useless speculation since it doesn´t and since the -114 seems to be inferior to the -65. @ Wolverine: Thanx m8, but wrong guy here for that page: I use them as cheap pins for IPSC gun training...;)

Is the Hog really non-lasing? What exactly does the Pave Penny pod on the A-10 do? Which, by the way, isn´t simulated in LO either...;) This isn´t a rhetorical question! I really don´t know what it does, thought it was a laser of some sort.

Hi Jinker! Welcome to the wonderful world of military flightsimming communities. The tone is rougher here than in the beautiful and shiny, politically correct, Crew Ressource Management governed MSFS and VATSIM world. People here are highly competitive in all aspects from knowledge to dogfight skills. Furthermore, they literally "kill" each other on a daily basis. This somehow reflects in the behaviour of some people here who forget to "simulate" the ethos of flying-officers as well... But since you on the other hand jumped right into the middle of the party with your pants down, things are even now I guess, with some apologies said and all. Fact is, everyone here welcomes you to the community and everyone appreciates the committment you displayed by the money you already spent for appropriate hardware, which will further support the genre. Some people simply adjusted to your way of saying "hi", though they should have known better and kept their cool when confronted with a new hotshot. Now that everything is fine again, we can all concentrate on battling the reason for high emotions, frustration and outbreaks in this community: -the lack of groundbreaking software supply in the genre...