S.h.r.i.k.e.

I have a AMD Phenom II X2 555 Callisto BE 3.2GHz AM3 overclocked to 3.5GHz. It is dual core, obviously. I know that Black Shark doesn't really take direct advantage of dual cores, except minorly. I have a socket AM3 motherboard. I am just wondering if there is a better CPU (that will give noticeable fps improvement) I can buy without having to change out my motherboard. There are a bunch of better multiple cored socket AM3 processors, but since BS cant really take advantage of the multiple cores, I'm not sure any would really provide a noticeable improvement. Am I wrong?

I have done a lot of tweaks and stuff to improve my fps in Black Shark. They have helped a lot; however, I still find my game stuttering or in the low to mid 30 fps frequently. I would just like to smooth things out a bit. I have ~$140-150 to spend. Is there anything I can upgrade in that price range that will allow me to see a noticeable improvement? AMD Phenom II X2 255 Callisto BE 3.2GHz AM3 Overclocked to 3.5GHz Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium Sapphire Radeon HD 4670 1 GB DDR3 Crucial 4x1GB DDR3 SDRAM 1333 (PC3 10600) Western Digital Caviar Blue WD3200AAKS 320GB Thanks!

I would just like to clarify a point concerning the combat employment of the Ka-50. Russian doctrine does not allow for hovering while in combat, correct? They instruct their pilots to always be moving, right? If so, I have a lot of practicing to do before I'm even close to combat effective... :blush: I guess it makes sense. Even though the pilot would have a much more difficult job killing things, it would significantly reduce the chances of a random shoot down. For example, if you hovered behind a tree line in order to Vihkr some tanks a couple thousand meters off, there could be some infantry close by that you didn't see. I imagine they could do a number on you, even with a couple PKMs, if you were hovering say 1-300m away from them. If they had a MANPAD, you would have no chance. Whereas if you were constantly moving, it would severely mitigate circumstances like that.

The 30mm gun on the Ka-50 has 2 rate of fire settings, high and low. In what sorts of circumstances should each rate of fire be employed?

I have the downloaded copy of BS. I needed to upgrade my processor to make the game smoother on my sysem. The only thing I changed out was my processor. The game decided that I switched systems and forced me to use up another activation. That kind of sucks...

Hello, I'm in the process of remapping my controls. My CH Products USB Pro Throttle has a mouse like control on it. I would like to map the clickable cockpit mouse x/y axis to that. Also, I would need to map the actual cockpit clickable mouse click to another button on the throttle. Is this possible?

I'm new to the sim and was messing the "Instant Action" mission on fake realism. Anyway the first tanks you encounter in the valley on that mission appear to be T-72's (not sure of type though). Anyway, I was ~600m high at their 5'oclock. The laser rangefinder showed that I was 1200m away. Anyway I dumped ~80 rounds of AP 30mm into the top rear of one of the tanks. I did it in 5-10 round bursts. With most of them impacting the tank. It did not seem to hurt it at all, no smoke or anything. I switched to the ATGM to finish them off. It seems to only takes 5-15 rounds to kill a BMP from almost any angle. I didn't think it was possible for a tank to withstand a salvo of 30mm AP on the top of the engine block. But I'm no armor expert... Is it the fake setting that causes this, or are tanks much more heavily armored on the rear than I thought?

I do not believe I can swing enough money for the Phenom ii X4. However, if you guys think I will see enough of an improvement going to the Phenom II X2 555 3.2 GHz, then I could do that. But to clarify, even though my Athlon II X2 is overclocked to 3.2GHz and that Phenom is the same 3.2GHz, I will still see a significant improvement? Is the increased CPU cache amount what really matters to Black Shark?

I did the tweaks from the tweak guide and have messed with a few settings. BS is fairly smooth now. However, I get stutters a little too often. That kills the whole immersion factor for me. So what processor would I have to upgrade to in order to notice a decent improvment in Black Shark FPS and smoothness? I'm running an Athlon II X2 2.9GHz overclocked to 3.2GHz, 4GB DDR3 RAM, ATI HD 4670 1GB, on Win7 64. The mother board is socket AM3, so I would need to keep that socket.

Mi-28 vs. Ka-50 which is the better attack helicopter (all things cosidered)? Also, does anyone know how many of each have been built (all variants)?

Thanks for the info guys! I just pulled out the Windows 7 64bit disc and installed it. I ordered 2 more GB of DDR3 Ram (which will put me at 4GB total). Do you really think my processor, Athlon II X2 245 2.9GHz is bad enough to warrant an upgrade there? If so, which AM3 AMD chip would be good enough?

I can't believe this! I just reinstalled the original Lock On. I jumped in the A-10 on that quick start mission in the main menu. I did a strafing run at the 2 trucks driving down the road and destroyed them. I was ~100m away from them as they exploded. My frame rates must have dropped to single digits because the game started to chug. Once I flew past the smoke/explosions, everything instantly went smooth again. Something is seriously wrong with the game coding if my new system (which has to be better than the top of the line system when the game was first made) still chuggs at those instances. I have an Athlon II X2 2.9GHz, 2GB DDR3 RAM, ATI HD 4670 1GB, and Windows 7 32bit. So my question is this, Black Shark should obviously have a lot of this type of ground pounding explosions going on. Did they optimize the coding for it any better or will I still chugg like crap whenever I blow something up if I buy it? In LOMAC, it didn't seem as big of a deal because you were at altitude shooting missiles a lot of the time.

Thanks for the info guys. I just got on ebay and ordered a new TrackIR 4 + Trackclip Pro for $121.50 shipped - $9.72 bing cashback = ~$112. Now when you factor in that can sell my TrackIR 2 on ebay for something like $30? (don't know really how much it is worth), it makes the overall total not quite as bad.

I have an old Saitek X45 joystick from a few years ago. I just got it out of storage and it seems to have become noticeably less smooth. I'm just wondering if there is a way to lubricate it and if so, what sorts of lubs are OK?

I would like to purchase a printed manual for Black Shark. However, at the only place I could find: http://www.kengray.co.uk/lockonbuy.htm They are charging me $53.19 (including shipping) to get it to the USA. That is more than the actual game! Is there anyplace else I can get it more reasonably priced? Thanks

I'm just wondering if this is legit or what? http://www.direct2drive.com/7938/product/Buy-DCS:-Black-Shark-Download It is $15 vs $40 direct from the source?

I currently have a TrackIR 2. I used to play sims a lot a few years ago. I am just wondering if there is really any reason to pay ~$100 and upgrade to a newer model? Would it just be slight improvement to go to a TrackIR 4, or would it be a night and day difference?

I currently have LOMAC. I especially enjoyed the ground pounding in the A-10. Assuming that I will only be casually playing and will not be playing online much, if at all, which version of Flaming Cliffs should I get? The first for ~$15 on DVD or the 2.0 version fro ~$30 and have to wait until it is released on DVD? I do not like the download only option... I'm leaning on getting the original FC right now.

I'm debating on getting Black Shark, but I am unsure of whether it will run decent on my computer. I can't stand choppy graphics in games. Will I have to turn most of the setting down quite a bit? Athlon II X2 245 2.9 GHz 2GB DDR3 RAM ATI HD 4670 w/ 1GB DDR3 RAM Windows 7 32bit Thanks

I have been downloading a lot of jet videos and pictures on the web recently. Unfortunately, I am not very familiar with the most of the European jets. I began to notice that many modern Euro military jets are tail-less delta winged designs (Mirage, Rafale, Typhoon, Vulcan, ect.). I'm just wondering why the Europeans seem to favor this design over the conventional winged design. The USA and the Soviet Union were the two major superpowers during the 70's and 80's when many of todays fighters were designed. Thus, I'm assuming (I admit that I am fairly ignorant on this topic, so all you Europeans, please don't get angry at me) that the two major superpowers in the world would be using the "best" design for fighters and that the tail-less delta wing is, overall, an inferior design. Anyway, why do the Europeans seem to like their delta wings so much?

They fixing the Slammers in BS? What about the 15's radar?

Ah, that makes a lot of sense. It's all coming together...

First off, I was going to post in this thread. http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?t=15615 But I didn't want to risk a flame war starting there; I still do not want one here, but just in case I started a new topic. Anyway, that other thread had these two quotes by Jane's, "By late 2004, it was being presumed that no further production of Ka-50s would take place, the Russian Air Forces having, instead, chosen Mil Mi-28 as main attack helicopter, backed by smaller number of Kamov Ka-52s." "Four for Russian Army service trials, plus eight flying prototype and pre-series helicopters; all delivered. Further 10 ordered in 1997 budget and six in 1998, of which first three were due for delivery before end of 1998; initial helicopter eventually completed in June 1999, two more being due by mid-2000. By early 2004, it was still unclear if helicopters from the first batch of 10 had been delivered to Army Aviation. Two operational Ka-50s shown at Moscow Salon in August 2001 may have been repainted trials aircraft. One army helicopter lost in accident, 17 June 1998; attributed to rotor clash." If I understood Jane's assesment correctly, my question is why are they making a simulation of the Ka-50 if there are only a handful (like 32 total built) of them in the world; and they are discontinued because the Mi-28 was chosen as the main attack helicopter? Shouldn't they simulate a piece of equipment that is fairly widespread and actually likely to see a lot of combat? Maybe the Mi-28 or AH-64A/D? Prior to reading this article, I assumed that because the Ka-50 was being simulated, it was the latest and greatest Russian helo design that would lead Russia into the next century. Don't get me wrong, I'm still looking forward to buying the game because it will be a good quality sim of an under simed genre, helos. But, I'm sure there is something I am missing. This is not a flame; but please enlighten me why the Ka-50 was chosen to be simulated! Thanks

How do real A-10 pilots ID targets for Maverick missile launch? This question comes because when I am playing the game, I usually try to shoot my K's at around 2.5-3.0 miles, and my D's at around 7.0 miles. At these ranges, the targets appear as little dots in the Maverick missile camera in the cockpit. I can't tell if I am shooting a pickup truck, BMP, Shilka, a burnt out T-80, friendly, ect. I'm thinking it would be very hazardous to one's health to do a fly-by for visual ID, especially if you are trying to destroy a Shilka or something of that nature. The most important aspect of the Maverick would be wasted (stand-off range). Are the Maverick optics/game graphics in our cockpit not accurate or not magnified enough? If my gaming experience with the Mavericks was inidicative of real life, and I was the enemy commander, I would put decoy boxes about the size of a BMP or tank all over the place and make the A-10's waste all their Mavericks (at least the K's) and not be the wiser. So, what do real A-10 pilots do? BTW, here is a picture of a BMP locked on at at 2.7 miles. Note, it's about one pixel in size (this was taken at 1152x864 resolution)

My missle slider was set on 75%. I changed to it 100% and then tried 50%. Both made the missle work perfectly!!!! When it was at 75%, the maverick would shoot almost straight toward the target. Now it pops up in the air and then comes almost straight down for a kill all 6 times that I tried it! Thank you guys for the help! BTW, which is more realistic 50% or 100% for missile effectiveness?