GiGurra

Very nice

FC was my first flightsim/flightgame, those pictures look really odd to me :)

If you think the Ramp is too complex I dont know if OF is a very good idea. If you want to touch the programming and configuration of the more delicate systems....hmm.....I guess OF is the game to go with, but if you want to just fight with some realism, AF or RV are ok I guess. (hate them myself though =)

Imo all the skins posted in this thread look REALLY impressive. I wish lomac had proper skin support, so that we could actually show off in public servers :)

I just did a test in OF comparing it to : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3VuypkS4PI felt pretty much spot on, but that could just be me.

So with mr Pilotasso's knowledge we can conclude both games/sims being way off =) I have no idea if this applies to both OF and F4AF/vanilla/RV, but I saw a vid on youtube of a pilot doing some crazy shit in the f16 straight after takeoff (you saw it from the cockpit view with the hud in front). speeds 130-400 kts. The handling looked EXACTLY the same as what I see in OF, but ofc hard to compare to whats being said by someone that actually flies the thing irl.

Falcon imo feels way more accurate, and the sensation of accelleration is better in there imo. The keyword is FBW(falcon) controls vs non-FBW controls(lomac).

Hmm.....I suspected something like this. The engines definately feel weak in lomac compared to for example Falcon (OF to be more precise). I wonder how FO will deal with this.

This thread has grown pretty large......didn't expect this much :)

Uh oh. I could fill a few pages with possible exploits, but would it be a bad idea to post here in the forums? Fact of the matter is that I dont use them, but I could if I wanted to. Unfortunately if I post em here someone is probably gonna end up using some. Should I post anyway?:music_whistling:

Sry for not saying so earlier, I was interested in the 1v1 sit.

Well i'm sure if you focus only on arcade gameplay and graphics only, you would get a lot of games looking like that :)

Using this with HMS+eos+ET/ER pretty much makes you invincible over water against f15s, even with those tactics, pilot, I dont think it would work.

Well perhaps in the distant future then we might be seeing some improvements here with wasm :). Yes sidelobes, but thats only for a VERY short while, unless low aspect ofc.

I have to disagree. If you make a decision to model a game to a certain level of realism, that level should be reflected throughout the game, and should not completely mess up balance, and this is a matter of system balance, not MP balance. What I'm saying is : If you make one system of a certain level of realism, then the countering system imo should be of the same (yes, this also includes eccm :). This often translates in a balanced game, but even though I want this to be the same, it sometimes is not. (Think Falcon4 ramp start with lomac easy radar ^^)

I myself have a very hard time figuring out (and havent done so yet!) why SARH missiles even start following chaff even if the radar of the firing plane does not, but that's another story entirely :). (Answer : Radioactive chaff!)

u the man, GG ^^

Err....so now we got Ice vs GG here. Very interesting indeed ;) My question is really about IRL performance. Weather the game models this or not is somewhat secondary here for me, believe it or not. On the other hand, if we are to model airplanes as invincible to radar missiles below 10m meters, we might as well throw some water into the intakes of the aircraft when they are closer than 2-3 m to the ground. Would create some interesting situations! (long term effects not recommended! - also how come the aircraft radar so perfectly has no problems with the water then :)) hmm....If we look at radar wavelengths perhaps we could create some nice interference patterns with the water, who knows, might be very confusing, for BOTH missile and attacking aircraft.

This is the game limit, then?

Why would it need to be fixed if the RL limit is around 10-20m?

I am well aware of that, but the question was something else ^^

Well, the question. Is there a golden limit irl where sub 10m-flying completely makes a2a radar missiles useless? I realize of course that ground clutter can play a significant role, but a fast head-on target below 10m should be trackeable. Seeing as airborne radars do track it well in game, I am a bit curious why missiles (non-IR) seem to just DIE 100% of the time against extremely low-flying targets. This got me iced a few times earlier (sry could not resist ^^) Somewhere I read the r-27EM for example can track targets below 10m irl (normal weather/humidity), although it wont in lomac. Ofc we cannot have pure realism, but having flown these tactics myself, I eventually found it utterly boring "going amraam immunity mode". I have not been able to find any information on the amraams real life minimum altitude under normal weather conditions.

Airquakers :). Thats a good squad name!

Agrees fully. Problem: Coordinated 2v2+fights are very rare in public servers =/. Doable, possible, but mainly restricted to planned squad battles. Don't get me wrong, overall I do believe this is a step that needs to be taken, but I'm unsure if overall MP balance should/will take a beating from partial Realism. We shouldn't get into that discussion here.

I can confirm the latest beta 101.41 drivers work well with lomac in vista using the 8800gtx, something the current WHQL does NOT.