Lock On is slowly but surely vanishing from the radar

[Alfa]

The Su25/25t and A10 arent really competition to eachother.

 

For A2A you can have real human competition. A2G, well since we only can fly, that leaves the G to AI.

 

Exactly! :)

 

From an overall game perspective I can understand that people would like to be able to fly a helicopter from both sides of an engagement, but from a mission perspective the notion that you need a flyable Apache to "counter" the Ka-50 is nonsense - helicopter vs. helicopter combat is not a common occurance and the "opposite number" to an attack helo would be things like AAA and SAMs of ground units.

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[SUBS17]

Exactly! :)

 

From an overall game perspective I can understand that people would like to be able to fly a helicopter from both sides of an engagement, but from a mission perspective the notion that you need a flyable Apache to "counter" the Ka-50 is nonsense - helicopter vs. helicopter combat is not a common occurance and the "opposite number" to an attack helo would be things like AAA and SAMs of ground units.

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

 

It was a common occurance in Longbow 2, especially since both sides were about equal in technology and quantity of weapons. Had quite a few cool dogfights in LB2.:icon_supe

[SUBS17]

> (waiting to get banned for expressing my opinion....)

 

You won't get banned for that, but you might get a clip round the ear for not realising people say the same thing almost every week. ;-)

 

They're still wrong though. More aircraft does not make a better sim. Never has, never will.

 

Andrew McP

 

You couldn't be more wrong, the more flyable aircraft the more immersive the sim.

[yamangman]

It's a good thing. Lock On has run it's development course. It should be ditched in favor of somthing new and (hopefully) bug-free.

[Guest ThomasDWeiss]

It's a good thing. Lock On has run it's development course. It should be ditched in favor of somthing new and (hopefully) bug-free.

 

It hasn't - far from that, there is plenty of life in it.

 

If you want something new you should wait say three or four years - in 2010 you would get a new product and it would be bug free in 2012.

[Ironhand]

...the more flyable aircraft the more immersive the sim.

Really? I've never had a problem with immersion even when this sim line featured only the Su-27. Never had a problem with immesrsion when other a/c frames were added, either. Whatever cockpit I'm in, the hair on the back of my neck will stand on end when things aren't going as expected. My heart rate goes up. I've screwed up landings because my hands were still shaking after a tough mission. No. More aircraft do not automatically make a sim more immersive. More aircraft will provide more variety in mission types, etc. But that does not make it more immersive.

 

Rich

[Jester_159th]

You couldn't be more wrong, the more flyable aircraft the more immersive the sim.

 

 

That's a very subjective issue. Personally I think that how immersive a sim is has got nothing what-so-ever to do with the number of flyable aircraft. It has everything to do with how the campaign engine handles the world outside the cockpit. It comes from hearing other flights on the comms, seeing other packages taking off and landing with real missions that , although beyond your personal control at that time, impact on what happens in the simulated environment you're operating in. Not to mention other "smaller" things like a proper day/night cycle, changing weather etc. It doesn't matter if you've got 1000 different flyable aircraft, if the world around you is sterile there is no immersion.

 

Also, the more flyable aircraft there are, unless the development effort is going to be farmed out to 3rd party builders, the less time the dev team have for each one. This leads to less realistic avionics, FM's, DM's. Guesses and best estimates replace research and that's the end of any sort of simulation. What you get instead is a game.

[504MrWolf]

If Lockon has run its course then we didnt get much for the blood, sweat and tears we shed to keep it "on course".

 

2-3 Failed online multiplayer campaigns, lots of Lockon squads struggling to keep numbers up and hair/sleep/time loss from fighting a un-helpfull map editor.

 

Then to top it all every patch breaking all our hard work and making us rebuild everything again.

 

If ED would help SwingKid make his Single/Multi Play dynamic campaign system work in Lockon then we would have an all new Lockon with 1.2 !!

 

Dynamic Campaign generator for CAW/BSO/Squad..etc or KA50 ? I wanna see both because Lockon is the only SIM i like, i dont want to fly fully clickable cockpits in ED's new titles so i doubt i willbe supporting them after Lockon.

 

SP/MP DC is what has kept Falcon on peoples HDD's to this date, i want to have Lockon on mine for the next 4-5 years and stillbe in 504th teahing new pilots how to enjoy Lockon !

 

I have so many ideas for missions and campaigns, i want to run CAW again but these are just dreams and hopes that cannot be realised without a campaign generator thats easy to use.

 

Wolf

[GGTharos]

Wolf. Be patient ;)

[Guest ThomasDWeiss]

I agree - it is frustrating.

 

On a personal note - I am working on what probably will be my last mission pack,

it will be ready by June. After that ...

[Bucic]

Dynamic Campaign!

In this matter Lock On is nothing but pitiful. There's nothing to discuss about. And even more - ED will never do anything about this as long as a whole bunch of people excuse the lack of DC in Lock On.

 

And I agree with author of this thread. Lock On will vanish without the Enviroment and code optimization.

 

Multiplayer gameplay proves it. MP in LO looks like MP in silly Counter Strike.

 

The possibility of learning some of the basic flight elements thanks to high fidelity (and smooth) flight model of non-fly-by-wire aircrafts and traditional cockpit instruments (which also work smooth) are the only reasons why I'm still a Lock On user (not a fan).

 

Observing the development process of every Lock On release one can say, that ED choose a way with dead end. There's not even a clue which would tell us that ED is working on DC.

 

Sometimes even graphics (which seemed to be the biggest "pro" of LO) looks bad. By "bad" I mean it looks sugary instead of immersive (realistic) wasting hardware potential.

[Olgerd]

Dynamic Campaign!

In this matter Lock On is nothing but pitiful. There's nothing to discuss about. And even more - ED will never do anything about this as long as a whole bunch of people excuse the lack of DC in Lock On.

 

Never say never. ;)

[Guest ThomasDWeiss]

Never say never. ;)

 

Hope springs eternal.

[Bucic]

I'm a realistic and this (lack of DC in LO) is not funny for me since a loooong time ago. It just the way it is.

And I think possible disgrace doesen't bother ED.

Yes, disgrace, because almost 10 years old titles had DC!

[355th_Paulie]

You may wish for there to be a US heli, but its too much time and investment.

 

It is better to get the BS out, a few patches to make it solid, and then move on to code that UBI has no rights to. Plus from what I have "assumed" from what ED has said on the forums, the current code has some limits they wish to be done with.

 

AMEN.

[Bucic]

Never say never. ;)

 

Let me hear, why :cool:

[tflash]

Jee, guys, springtime evidently brings some depressive mindstates!

I have all relevant current sims on my PC, and I must say each day I am more amazed what a fantastic sim FC 1.12a really is.

 

Breathtaking graphics, real tactics, awesome weapons like GAU-8 Avenger and R-77, the whole SAM/SEAD experience, the SU-25 AFM, and then this beautiful 3D-model of the F/A-18 Hornet! I do not miss DC at all.

 

With the current patch, it is also one of the most smoothly running games on my PC.

 

Once BS is out, I'll be eager to fly the Ka-50, but one thing is beyond question: humancockpit=yes on the Hornet, since if I'm right all non-flyables will get SFM. :)

[Kula66]

real tactics, awesome weapons

 

How can you have real tactics when A2A missiles and radar modelling is so broken?

[GGTharos]

Just don't whine when the new implementation refuses to see the chaff (as it should be!) ... ;)

 

PS: No, I'm not saying that it's been fixed. I'm saying how it should be.

[tflash]

How can you have real tactics when A2A missiles and radar modelling is so broken?

 

Because it is not broken at all. The sim is build that way that makes it possible to have these never ending discussions about how missiles and radars should perform, precisely because the engine allows it to be moddelled.

 

Opinions about missiles and radars will continue to differ vehemently on these forums, whatever the changes made. What will stay also is the real playability of it all. Please explain me why it would be more or less fun if an Amraam would perform better by having - as we guess - better ECM rejection? It would still be the same - very good - game, with other parameters.

 

The same very good pilots would lead the charts, no doubt about that either.

[Bucic]

Breathtaking graphics, real tactics, awesome weapons like GAU-8 Avenger and R-77, the whole SAM/SEAD experience, the SU-25 AFM, and then this beautiful 3D-model of the F/A-18 Hornet! I do not miss DC at all.

Wooow, so we give up ONLY DC for all of this cool stuff? :p

[Mizzy]

I look at this forum almost every day, whats the point going anywhere else ;)

 

As for simhq, I cannot stand the over policed policy which has left the place sterile, uninteresting and frankly moribund. Plus the fact I am banned from simhq and like it to remain that way.

 

Frugals was for the Falcon cronies, a gentlemans (not quite) smoke room talking about a over complicated piece of outdated software. NO FLAMES PLEASE as its just my opinion, nothing more.

 

Besides I don't have time to visit all the forums only this one and occasionally my other hobbie forum which I suspect no one will find of any interest here :)

 

Mizzy.

[Floyd]

Frugals was for the Falcon cronies, a gentlemans (not quite) smoke room talking about a over complicated piece of outdated software.

Mizzy.

 

Hwg, let me guess - you feel warm and cosy with LOMAC - each to his own.

 

What is so complicated and outdated in your opinion? I'm just curious ...

[Floyd]

Well I don't know what mizzy thinks, but I would call that fugly 8 year old Dx7 graphics engined sim out of date.

 

F4:AF makes a good coffee coaster though. :icon_lol:

 

And your new, up to date DX8 hokey pokey wannabe sim doesn't get the missiles right. Have you any clue about good coffee coasters or any substantial arguments?

[Alfa]

Ok keep it civilised everyone.

 

- JJ.