Hawg11

Yikes! $899.00

I haven't played it, but from what I've read OFP is similar to what you mention; same with Battlefield2. Granted the FM's and avionics won't be on par with what we are used to, but as technology and computer power advances, we can expect the fidelity to increase in these games. http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=5102&pl=game&type=wmv I agree, though. It would be nice if ED would get into this. I think it would even be worth thier while to open the source code and subcontract to an FPS based company.

Ice posted the 169th server's IP. The "mother of all stickies" thread has a bunch of dedicated server IP's listed. And Ubi has a version 1.12 server up right now with 5 of 10 players flying in it.

I haven't, personally, experienced a crash at Ubi, but I will take your word for it. Jetfire is working on a utility that may make it possible to bypass the command line to autolaunch Ubi's lobby. That should (in theory) resolve any crashing issue, as the clinet and host's IP would be directly connected without relying on the lobby running in the background. http://forum.lockon.ru/showpost.php?p=164404&postcount=91

There may be a server or two there. Most folks who play 1.02 play at Ubi, at the moment. Jetfire is working on utility that would make a server show up in Ubi's Lobby and HyperLobby at the same time (if the server chooses to do so).

There's a second server called "Fox2 ver 1.12" with 6/6 players online. Very cool...

I just checked back. That 1.12 server (hosted by oleg_rus) is full with 8/8 players. Good stuff...

Ubi still up. 37 players online and one v1.12 server.

Folks could recruit from the UBI boards during this down-time (if they were so inclined) :) Maybe even get a few 1.12 games going there to build some interest...

You're killin' me! :) After your whole rant about how Ubi is crap. http://forum.lockon.ru/showpost.php?p=162703&postcount=48 Now you're saying that Ubi might have better support than HL? Jetfire, Good stuff, man. Thanks, as always.

Rgr. I don't think it would be too complicated for Jiri at HL. Basically just have to disable the auto-launch feature for the host and allow the client to link diectly to the game, to the host's IP address. Pretty much, lobbies like this just inform the client computer what the host computer's IP is in the background. It may be as simple as adding an "in game" button next to the "launch session" button. The "in game" button would minimize HL while still allowing HL to share the host's IP with the client, instead of launching the game. The host would then be free to launch the game through another Lobby (UBi Online).

How is that "your bad"?

Well it's been a while since I wrote this at HyperLobby. http://hyperfighter.sk/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=1858 (Sent it 02-14-2006, 02:30 AM) Still no response. I was hoping to hear something from them by now. Oh well...like the saying goes, you get what you pay for :)

http://www.lockonfiles.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=69&mode=&order=0&thold=0

Excellent video.

I started a new topic at HyperLobby http://hyperfighter.sk/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=1858 Here's what I wrote: "Hi. First off, I really like HyperLobby, and have been using it for years. I would like to know if this could be implemented? Could someone host a game in a lobby like UbiOnline and HyperLobby at the same time? The advantage would be that players browsing either lobby could join that host's game. Thanks for your consideration and time. Dave "Hawg11" St. Jean" Hopefully, folks who agree with 169th_Gideon and me that it would be nice to simultaneously host through both Ubi and HL will speak up there.

Really, I'm not asking you to do anything. I did suggest you load a 169th server on Ubi (if you want to get some people interested in 1.11, 1.12 over there). I suggested it as an alternative to this pointless arguing. Physical circumstances prevent me from serving a 1.11, 1.12 game at Ubi (I don't own it). But I would be willing to host there, if I owned it and really wanted to promote 1.11, 1.12 as you appear to. It's cool that you are sacrificing your time. But, if you used 169th recourses you wouldn't have to. I wasn't suggesting that you give up time yourself; I was suggesting that the 169th tries to use some resources to host at Ubi, if possible. I see you and Kondor_Moscow in a game at UBI right now. I guess someone joined (02-14-2006, 02:06) AM :) http://hyperfighter.sk/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=6208#6208

Rgr that. I tried a long time ago, to no avail :( I'll send an e-mail to Jiri at HyperLobby to ask him if he could implement this feature. If enough of us ask, maybe he'll do it :)

Nice analogy Weta43. I host games in Ubi all the time. I don't ask people to do what I'm not willing to do myself. It's a trait taken from my military training.

What I was saying earlier was that you might want to look in to asking the leadership at the 169th if they'd be willing to host a server at Ubi to drum up interest in 1.11, 1.12. http://forum.lockon.ru/showpost.php?p=162339&postcount=35 I thought it was clear that I don't use 1.11, as yet. I do serve 1.02 online when I play.

Regardless, my offer stands to assist, if you decide to host at 1.11, 1.12 at Ubi. As i said, I think it could be valuable to spread the word there about FC and BS, for those who don't know about it. Cheers.

I'm not surprised in the least that you didn't bother to get the stats for the "other" lobby. Your thinking is one sided, thus your facts only show one side. And then they reduce it to insults. Ony a matter of time :(

Do you post by a different name elsewhere, by any chance? I just find it interesting that you have 4 total posts. And of that 3 have been addressed to me. Your rant would have some credibility.

That's your opinion :) It's interesting that you pick and choose. There's no sticky at this (ED's) site pointing to HyperLobby. By your reasoning that means ED doesn't support online gamers. I don't see you upset that ED has no online lobby. Why is that? From that point of view, it appears that ED discontinued support of LockOn at UBI. How can you fault UBI for that?

I can appreciate you getting heated because you are passionate about the subject. I like that. My guess is UBI disabled chat because other players were talking crap to each other. But since neither one of us were there at the time, it's all speculation. But right now we're discussing facts, right? Anyway, UBI has a forum and a lobby which supports LockOn. Here's the address. http://forums.ubi.com/eve/ubb.x?a=frm&s=400102&f=38610606 That means it's a fact. There are new players who are assisted there (some of which I've helped) for all versions of Lockon. Here are some threads that prove this for a fact: http://forums.ubi.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/38610606/m/6941075114 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/38610606/m/3571031114 Now, prove to me I'm wrong. (Try to use facts.) I'm not sure what other kind of support you want, but I don't think they'll be coming over to give you a massage. I've only got 7 of these left to go.