Trident

Just one question: When? ;) ;)

I've seen something about memory leaks being mentioned but can't remember anything to do with controller response.

How is getting systems behaviour mixed up something else than any other bug? It's hardly the first time a problem of this type has surfaced, in LOMAC or sims in general. There is a multitude of perfectly mundane reasons why this bug may have reared its head - perhaps they thought it worked like that back then? Maybe it was a known issue which they simply didn't get around to fixing earlier? Seriously, your question is rather perculiar even though I don't see any reason why ED should not answer it. This is akin to asking the cook why he mistakenly added too much salt to the soup - AFTER he has apologised and promised to do better next time ;)

Excellent! :) EDIT: Been looking for that particular Flanker photo you posted for a long time now, thanks! Simply beautiful.

LOL, I've frequently wondered if ED wouldn't have been better off making Flanker3.0 instead of LOMAC ;)

The reason why F4 gets away without pop-up is that there are preciously few buildings to pop-up in the first place. That's a pretty dubious accomplishment, IMHO :P With visible range on high things are acceptable in LOMAC, but the price in FPS is heavy, granted.

Can't wait to try that, sounds like an interesting addition to the SEAD environment.

The interesting thing is that Starforce was apparently intended to work similarly - Roman (G) makes some good points.

Does this work for AI aircraft other than your own wingmen? If so that's pretty nice already, I wasn't aware of this! I'll make sure to watch that track as soon as I can. Sounds broadly similar to EECH, if you give an 'attack my target' command in that sim the call automatically includes bearing and range to your current target IIRC. The caveat is that this FAC sim is probably geared towards human FACs communicating with human strike aircraft - this is something that requires little to no changes compared to what we already have in LOMAC. I sure hope they will feel compelled to expand on this to include AI units, though.

Not going to happen IMHO. They've probably invested way too much time and money into this distribution system. If that's possible it would be a much more acceptable way of doing it. I'm not very computer-savvy but initially it was claimed that we'd only need to use an activation when changing more than 40% of our hardware - something that is much closer to what you describe rather than what we have now. Basically, reactivating would only be required after a major hardware upgrade or changing computers altogether - in which case 15 activations would really be plenty. Even at 2 *major* upgrades a year (smaller ones would hopefully not cause trouble in the first place) the game would likely be abandon-ware by the time you run out ;)

Yes, but I don't think it takes a lot of imagination to see how people will consider paying again for something they've already purchased as bizarre and unfair. Particularly if they've done nothing illegal and CD-version users don't have this problem. I have 14 activations left and can't see myself running out but it still irks me somehow even though I'm not going to claim I didn't know about the limitation. The fact that, if nothing else, Starforce is obviously rather successful at preventing piracy makes this a very tough situation - I can understand ED being pretty pleased with this but OTOH it's undeniable that a system like the current one is asking a bit much from the user. I hope that this timely discussion makes ED reconsider for v1.2 and look at Starforce configurations which eleminate this problem. It also shows that ED really does need someone who is responsible for PR with English speaking users: not doubt they're only human but the western community could be spared a lot of confusion and ruffled feathers in situations like this ;) As for the 15 activations issue, when did you activate the last time? The number was raised only a few weeks after release, so this might not have taken place at that point. Maybe the 10 additional ones are only displayed after the first 5 are used?

FAC is a must really for a sim modelling the A-10 and Su-25. Even a glorified 'attack my target'-command that can be given to aircraft other than your wingmen (like in F4AF apparently) would be a big step in the right direction. These aircraft would be pre-set to check in with the FAC ('check in with FAC' waypoint in the editor that is linked to a specific FAC-aircraft much like an attack waypoint can be associated with a target) when building a mission. If the FAC is a player aircraft he would gain some limited control over them once they check in, much like he has with his wingmen, with commands like 'attack my target', 'attack airdefences', 'return to base' etc. This should work reasonably well with human/AI FACs and AI CAS aircraft. The hard part would be designing something usefull for a situation where the player is flying the attack aircraft. How is the AI going to give the player sensible commands? On the A-10 the desired target could be marked with a TISL (?) diamond, but on the Su-25? Smoke? I sure hope ED can introduce something like this with Tank Killers at the latest :) It would make LOMAC the best CAS sim by far.

I agree that there should not be a requirement to pay a second time, 15 activations or not. There just isn't any good reason for it to be that way, not to mention that ED reportedly told people to contact them if they ran out of activations and they'd see what they could do. Now, originally they stated that you'd have to pay again, but that statement was apparently revoked. Now, contacting the webmaster might be part of the problem, maybe were just looking at a misunderstanding. I certainly hope so.

'Flying formation around the pencil' really hits the nail on the head :)

Actually that article is a bit misleading, though not intentionally so. The new Su-27 derivant is NOT the T-50, the latter being Russia's counterpart to the F-35/F-22. What they're talking about is the Su-27BM aka Su-35BM which AFAIK is simply the next stage in the upgrade path for the existing Flanker fleet after the current Su-27SM. It will inherit a lot of technology that was developed for the Su-35 and subsequently Su-30MKI and obviously even beyond that with systems from the T-50.

Is it just me or does that rearview mirror look a lot clearer than the ones we currently have?

The Su-27 HUD in LOMAC is probably reasonably accurate. The Testpilot's Sukhois are used for testing new avionics and other systems (most recently TVC engines), so I'd be carefull about accepting their avionics fit as representative of a VVS Su-27. About the HDD, yes the one we have now isn't totally wrong but the HUD repeater is missing and the symbology isn't accurate.

Another point to consider is that AFAIK many modern ICBMs have so-called 'salvage fuzes' that will detonate the warhead if it senses that it is being hit. Nasty! Also, even ICBMs are just that, ballistic missiles just with a very long range. Orbital nukes (FOBS) are banned by treaties atleast between the USA and the USSR/Russia.

How about shortening your nick to 'superb' ;)

Cool, thanks! There are many scanned maps of most of Russia (and other countries in the parent directory!) here: http://mapy.mk.cvut.cz/data/Rusko-Russia/ I haven't checked yet if coverage includes LOMAC's theatre, but chances are pretty good given the sheer number of maps :) I don't think they're TPC's either (infact many appear to be Russian) but still interesting.

None of the aircraft in LOMAC are fitted with DIRCM, but quite a number have missile approach warners or IR jammers. The following planes fall into the former cathegory: - Tu-95 - Tu-142 - Tu-22M3 - Tu-160 - Su-24M - C-17 - B-1B and B-52, most likely but I can't seem to find the sensors on photos - just about all US helos - probably most Russian ones aswell, atleast the Ka-50 and Ka-52 can be expected to have such systems Here's a nice photo of the Russian missile detector on a Su-24: http://www.foxbat.ru/maks/brzeg_164ograp/index.php?picid=brzeg_164ograp025 IR jammers are installed on pretty much all Russian and American helicopters, aswell as the Su-25T of course.

Let's not forget that there have been some fine helo-sims in the past without most of those features though. Especially graphicswise there really isn't any existing helo title that comes even close to LOMAC as it is now (and who knows what ED will include for v1.2), so I don't see any problems in this particular area.

Wow... just wow. And it actually looks genuine, too (Still cautious after falling for the MiG-29 smoke, LOL! Good one Dronas, BTW :) ). There's a Black Shark screenshot over there that I can't recall seeing before. The best news is probably that this FAC stuff (and other realism related advances, such as better comms and avionics) is bound to make it into future commercial flightsims from ED, which in turn is going to make the already excellent CAS environment all the better. Is this the same professional sim product that was alluded to in the Russian interview some time ago?

Curiously enough they don't seem to use them publically though.