OGREMAN

It certainly is exactly what I need, after visiting your blog sites I am much more enlightened .... Thank you very much for taking the time to produce the blog and illustrations ... happy planning ahead for me. Post Script;- I still dont understand either the "CONCEPT" or "PRACTICAL APPLICATION" for flags in mission making.... bolien alogrithm or no, there is no adaquate explanation of their use in the documentation for BlackShark or LockOn FC2.

Your comment below is just what I said in the original response to Panzertard Q2 .... so what are the "settings" in Mis Ed that sets this to happen?

Thanks Panzertard,Q1- I will take another look at it. Q2- Ok that makes me wonder how it has been done in missions such as "STP Dragons Thunderstruck" where after destroying enemy around the (enemy) FARP several New KA50's are made available (activated) in the multiplay joining dialog. The said AC's are present throughout the mission but self destruct if selected before the enemy FARP is captured!.

Can anyone provide me with an explanation I can understand ... because I am tired of being irritated by the manual (written in English but talking S**t). When designing missions I would like to place "combat boxes" of various dimension on the ABRIS display that enclose and indicate areas of key interest for KA pilots. Further I would like to activate "captured KA's" (ie user flyable aircraft that can be made available as a result of an enemy Farp being captured) which I think can be done using "Flags" but the mission building dialog and the explanation of "Flags" in the manual is impossible for me to make sense of... Any contribution that will ease my confusion will be gratefully recieved. If ever there was a need for visual illustrations of a program function this would be it... is anyone out there producing tutorials for mission building with Video demonstration?.

Imported Group Gallery - SHREK AIR STRIKE Sqn DIE HARD

Hi CASE ... I suppose that what I am trying to say is the solution to better gameplay with FC2 lies in the hands of the mission designer.... and that there is no pleasure (its no fun) being in an aircraft that is designed to lose the fight in the name of reality.....

I have chewed the fat over this for the last couple of years and I simply have to put the case for modified or reduced reality when your server is seeking to provide a adverserial multiplayer service.... The need to put this view has been brought about by the developments that have ensued as a result of the "improved" missle performance as vigerously campaigned for by the fans of the F15 and now represented in Flaming Cliffs2. There is little doubt that changes to the perfomance of all the Air to Air missiles has left a single aircraft type with complete dominance of the virtual airspace in FC2. Further there is no doubt that these "improvements" are more representative of REALITY. REALITY SUCKS That said, lets consider what effect this has had on multiplayer gameplay, back in the days of LOFC-1.1 I recall that it was quite common for air battle events to be staged where literally more that 100 pilots would fly and compete in the same virtual airspace in simulated West Vs East air combat. This could no longer happen because a single Aircraft type dominates the Air to Air arena making competative play nearly impossible without placing an equal number of that aicraft on each side. Even if that was to happen those people who are dedicated fans of other Aircraft types now no longer have any realistic expectation of competing against that single aircraft. The end result ..... where there was once a lively community enjoying immersive gameplay for all Air to Air combatants there is now a "monoculture". Many very capable Virtual pilots have left the public community of LOFC because in order to satisfy a demand for reality at any cost.... they must die frquently or fly an aircraft that for them has absolutely NO APPEAL. I conclude that the goal of pure reality, is only beneficial to the gaming experience when all players are on the same side or the balance of potency is identical ie "monoculture". Q- Who would play a game of chess where only the black player has a full set of pieces? Furtermore I conclude that the move to "reality mod in FC1.12a" and the FC2 have not served to promote community but instead driven us all apart to our more fractured and reduced gameplay.

ULTIMATE FLIGHT SIM Ohhhh Yeahhhh First off... I should point out that what I know about programming is written in the top left corner of that postage stamp over there.... hmmm not much But the ultimate flight sim would be set up just like DCS FC2 with the virtual environment and mission planner with AI players etc being the base program with only lets say 2 aircraft types available at the start. The important difference would be that the physics and virtual physical world would be encrypted so as to be tamper proof by those compulsive tamperers that with best intention often do great harm to the usability of these sims. Now that the Virtual world is Tamper proof the program writers can focus on developing feature aircraft types that are as detailed and complete as to satisfy any budding sim fan. Each aircraft type would be purchased as a seperate add on and flown fully compatible in the common virtual world. The aircraft would also be tamper proof as far as weapon system loads and performance physics, but there would be a built in tool that would allow skins of clan patches to be cusomised to suit individual clans/pilots and that skin/patch graphic would be shared in the export files along with the mission map details when a pilot joined the mission. Because the virtual world would be tamper proof the compulsive tamperers and fiddlers (I am trying hard not use the word "cheats") would have to focus their "talents" on such things as skins or mission design and clan logos etc. Thus allowing the program writers to get paid for doing the occaisional graphics/texture improvement to the base program. Imagine such a virtual flight and fight sim world..... infinately increasing Nos of aircraft types would be complimented by the introduction of user playable vehicles and user playable avatars of even individual soldiers.. truely a community united in mayhem. And if it was all just too much then you could just strap on your favourite AC and go be a tourist in your own mission setup or break out your own avatar and set up a virtual cafe for tired combatants.

Hi Sticky.. S! "Try it and see first, otherwise you might miss out." I Take your point but you seem to have completely missed mine... when we fly any given AC... it is usual to spend a long time (several hours at a time) in that aircraft type, if then we all promptly went off to "Try it and see" then what is effectively happening is the community of pilots I have come to know and enjoy the company of (over many years/decades) will continue to be broken into ever smaller "interest groups", and all that for who's benefit?

UNLIKELY FC2 Compatability This piece of information has already convinced me not to buy if there is no means of flying with the rest of the community... mainly because while I do like to fly a range of aircraft types (love the A10), I am NOT interested in flying "Billy No Mates" in a solo sim without the fast movers. Part of the issue is that all important sense of community and part of the problem is that its very very inconvienient to be jumping into different programs when I want to fly a different AC. Simply put... if A10c is not FC2 flyable then I wont be using it.

A10C & FC2 NO FLY ZONE I have recently realised that flying the much anticipated DCS A10c in the FLAMING CLIFFS 2 program is "unlikely", this knowledge has caused me to re-evaluate my intent to buy this A10c program. While there are people out there who will get the A10c sim and be happy to fly it exclusively I cannot see any point in flying "Billy No Mates" in a single type sim program... which is why I did not buy "Black Shark" until it became flyable in FC2. I would be most interested to know just how many people flying FC2/BS are being discouraged from getting the DCS A10c program for the same reason.

No Practical target Desegnation outside of the "Wingman" feature. I am a keen writer of mission scenarios and have been trying to get a practical means of desegnating a target (as if by an FAC) for the A10a. It has come as a real dissappiontment to me that the FC2 mission planner has no practical means to emulate FAC target designation on "movers". In particular my excitment peaked at the prospect of placing a (Special Forces FAC) man on the map with a designator and a list of priority targets and/or the commonly used FAC designation operated by the UAV predator. Its very sad that this common mode of operation for the a10 is not available except through an AI wing, who it has to be said is NOT Intelligent enough to stay out of trouble (suicidal FAC) while designating targets (cannot effectively be directed to circle in a safe area).

Thanks Distiller, If only the manual made this fact clearer, along with the "intended use for the load/save profile function... there are I am sure lots of ppl having a difficult and confusing time with this. Well at least I am confused and in distress....

My Post on this subject has been ignored I posted the day after downloading FC2 (2 weeks ago) on this subject and had nothing but a stony silence. I have had only instability and unpredictable behaviour from the GUI controls/Key bindings interface. Problems have included, Saved keybindings for any AC when re-loaded bear no resemblence to the set saved. Particularly with the A10 but not only that AC, entire device interface colums are totally blanked and inaccessible. A previous set of keybindings that worked perfectly when originally set(and saved) are unuseable when re-loaded. Individual key bindings that worked fine, suddenly and without any input or alteration from me become "locked out" and refuse to work, a good example is the "pause/Break" key that now refuses to function, thus preventing any access to mission starting. (bit of a GAME BREAKER this one). I posted this problem very soon after installing the game with details of my RIG and screenshots to illustrate, yet while my "game broken" problem was ignored there were ppl have lavish interest and elaborate help proffered for what can only be regarded asminor niggles.It would have been completely understandable if the problem was so difficult to solve that it was going to take some time... but I didnt even get a aknowledgment that it had been looked at!

I have a mid range DuelCore PC with a good Graphic card and 3gig Ram, FC2 is running at slightly better or similar framerates to FC1.12 but delivering MUCH RICHER graphic detail.

Thanks but yes I did and it made no difference.

Hi Herig2, am I missing smething here? when you say "open as administrator" is there some setting unknown to me in TrackIR software.... I will repeat my original post " there is only one account on my dedicated gaming PC and all progs are running through it... it is the administrator account".

TrackIR configuration & FC2.0 Thankyou JimMack, I tried this and it made no difference, the Dialog in the FC2 control has simply left the TrackIR column totally blanked out and inaccessible for the (A10 ONLY) aircraft leaving all other AC working properly.

My TrackIR4 refuses to work for some AC and works very badly in others in FC2. Post Script EDIT PROBLEM SOLVED With a re install from new download.

TrackIR REFUSES TO WORK in FC2.0 My TracIR 4 is stubbornly refusing to operate in Flaming Cliffs 2.0. The software is definately working properly for the TrackIR so I can only think there is some setting I am missing in the FC2.0 software. If you have solved this problem I would love to know about how. I read that both programms must be operating from administrator but on my PC running winXP home, there is only one user account ie the green dude and that user account has admin privilages.

Thanks for your inputs Sov13t, they will be useful

OK.. Green Blokes Wish List, NOT IN PRIORITY ORDER 1. Fix Mid Air Refuel for multiplay 2. Allow A.I. to fly- land re arm then TakeOff again. 3. Allow Heli's to land and TO from anywhere. 4. Provide the ability to "build a forward air base" that can be used by Heli and designated player aircraft. 5 Allow all player aircraft to be flown on both BLUE and RED teams. 6 Prevent Modders from altering the "physics" of the virtual world ie the perfomance characteristics of "missles or aircraft". 7 Provide a unbreakable "authorised loadout" setting in the mission building tool. 8 Provide a "authorised Friendly airfield" setting in the mission building tool. 9 Fix, Radar performance, IFF,and other exploited game anomolies. 10 Provide a simple tool that will allow a custom crest or logo to be placed on a player aircraft that can be shared and seen by other users of the sim.(even just having the players"TAG" appear below the cockpit would improve things).

A Truely INTERESTING READ This interview conversation has at least provided a sense that ED has taken a stable and consistant approach to its development of what is a premier leader in combat flight simulation. I only regret that it has taken so long to see the benefit of merging the "Flaming Cliffs" user with the more hardcore study sim world of "Black Shark". For most of us, the interface is everything, that is why I use a fully enclosed cockpit replica. When the fighting is done I want to be able to feast on the physics of flight and visual fidelity so I can just "make like a tourist". What ED have already achieved has kept me coming back for more since the beginning so I will always be deeply grateful for the gift of flight they have provided.

ABSOLUTELY THE BEST NEWS ON LOMAC FC I HAVE SEEN for YEARS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH ED

Deepest expressions of GRATITUDE from all at -=Shrek=- Sqn, I sincerely hope that FC v2 will prevent the "death by Mod" that has caused much consternation with users of FC v1. Cant wait.......