aimmaverick Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 I have a question about A-10 air-air mode. Why is the aim-9 seeker reticule so small compared to F-15s? When still having cannon rounds, its small, but as soon as you empty it, it gets much bigger, similar what you get on the Eagle. This is a bug which exists from day 1 and still ED didnt find time to fix it. The community dont seem to bother also. And the switch which controls rate of fire for the cannon is still not working. Rate of fire simulated on A-10 is nowhere near reality. I wonder how is it with other cannons... same. Here are the screenshots: http://forum.lockon.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=5735&stc=1&d=1146930428 http://forum.lockon.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=5736&stc=1&d=1146931041 http://forum.lockon.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=5737&stc=1&d=1146931056 http://forum.lockon.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=5738&stc=1&d=1146931087 Secondly F-15. Why is that it still has unfunctioning navigation? It gets messed up on HUD and HSI, showing different numbers, bearing etc..( same case wtih A-10) And why do ground and true airspeed indications on radar display show incorrect numbers now? This bug wasnt present in Lomac. True airspeed will now show indicated airspeed, same as on the HUD. ??? Look, I dont want ED to IMPLEMENT NEW THINGS for western aircraft, obviously they completely ignore this, just to make avionics simulated WORKING. Is that too much too ask after all these years? All they do, is bring new russian hardware and improvements for it, but no improvement in western part. But in order to have a FUNCTIONING game these severe issues must be finaly fixed in Black Shark. Right now you cant fly complex missions with F-15 and A-10, simply because of fact, that navigation is messed up and this is the very basic element to have. Now that they are not anymore under Ubi Soft supervision, they decided to be arogant to US stuff and do just russian. Flaming Cliffs is nice example. Or Im doing something wrong? 1
Coffee999 Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 I agree with everything you said, but n ot the way you said it. :music_whistling: Your pic links don't work.
Alfa Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 ...Or Im doing something wrong? Well perhaps you could try counting to 10....or 20 before posting? :) Cheers, - JJ. JJ
SuperKungFu Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 yea your pictures don't work. Although they are valid points, shouting won't really convince someone to do something. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Ironhand Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 ...A-10 air-air mode. Why is the aim-9 seeker reticule so small compared to F-15s? When still having cannon rounds, its small, but as soon as you empty it, it gets much bigger, similar what you get on the Eagle. This is a bug which exists from day 1... If there is a bug there, it's not what I assume you think it is. The possible bug is that the reticule gets larger when the cannon is empty. ED had initially modelled the reticule as identical to that of the F-15 because they assumed it would be the same. Later they had an opportunity to view HUD footage of an A-10 using AIM-9s. The reticule was small and, so they made the modification in the sim. I can't comment on the F-15 because of the little cockpit time I have. As far as the A-10 nav issues are concerned, I haven't noticed any contradictions between the HSI and HUD. If I have time after I get home this evening, I'll have take a closer look. Rich 1 YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCU1...CR6IZ7crfdZxDg _____ Win 11 Pro x64, Asrock Z790 Steel Legend MoBo, Intel i7-13700K, MSI RKT 4070 Super 12GB, Corsair Dominator DDR5 RAM 32GB.
Hawg11 Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 The problem, I think, is that the A-10 should be able to uncage its sidewinders to track the target, at least a few degrees off boresight. Diceman should be able to confirm this... Dave "Hawg11" St. Jean
brewber19 Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 AIMMAVERICK: Nice attitude man :doh: , may be stay off the sugar for a while. Ranting at the Devs isn't likely to get a positive response...given the grief they get on these forusm...even if the issues are legitimate. I'm guessing your future career won't include politics or diplomacy then?! :D [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 487th Helicopter Attack Regiment, of the VVS504 Red Hammers
GGTharos Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 Unfortunately, fixing the current cockpits would be too much work - they want instead to move the aircraf tto the new cockpit technology (ie. Black Shark's) but when this will happen is anyone's guess. Fixing the old ones is pretty much a waste of time. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Coffee999 Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 Unfortunately, fixing the current cockpits would be too much work - they want instead to move the aircraf tto the new cockpit technology (ie. Black Shark's) but when this will happen is anyone's guess. Fixing the old ones is pretty much a waste of time. I would very much disagree with the last statement. For the one's like me that only fly the A10 and F15, it would not be a waste of time AFAIC. Maybe you ment: no payback dollar on the time spent. Huge difference there. I personally think two add-ons, and no major improvments to the a10 and F15 is an absolute shame for pilots like me that only fly LOFC, and only Western aircraft.
S77th-GOYA Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 Unfortunately, fixing the current cockpits would be too much work - they want instead to move the aircraf tto the new cockpit technology (ie. Black Shark's) but when this will happen is anyone's guess. Fixing the old ones is pretty much a waste of time. This attitude has got me very discouraged with ED. Basically, it equates to: We don't have the time to fix this thing that you've already paid for, we're busy working on something else that you can pay for. I do see the economic reality and necessity for it, but it doesn't make me feel any better about it.
GGTharos Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 Doesn't make me feel any better either ... I'm just resigned to it. It is an economic thing, yes ... for me though, I don't mind too much paying $40 or 50 a year to get the next iteration, and it does keep getting better. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Coffee999 Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 This attitude has got me very discouraged with ED. Basically, it equates to: We don't have the time to fix this thing that you've already paid for, we're busy working on something else that you can pay for. I do see the economic reality and necessity for it, but it doesn't make me feel any better about it. Absolutly Goya. This is what disheartens me too. If this was some little minor bug, I wouldn't be worried about it. But it's not. Personally, I would like to see ED spend some time on additional patches to fix some of these major bugs, and set the stage to bring in LOBS in the way it should be. This is my eyes, IS finacially feasable.
bflagg Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 Fixing the old ones is pretty much a waste of time. Hi GG.. But think about it .. you...a paying customer is essentially not getting what the damn box said.. and since that time....nothing has changed. You have invested considerable amount of time and money to this game(as we all have).. but it's still not the "sim" it was marketed to be. I agree with coffee and the intial poster. (overall) The quandry is quite simple on this forum. You be polite..and your ignored You be "loud" and your ignored..(but bashed by fellow "lomac-ians") and in some cases banned/warned. Either way..it's a put up or shut up attitude. LockON is done. kaput.. nowhere'sville.. fini....stick a fork in it.... It's now BS or nothing..... You may disagree,,, but this is how I feel about this situation and ED in general. (and as Goya pointed out.. it became an economical decision) Thanks, Brett
aimmaverick Posted May 6, 2006 Author Posted May 6, 2006 Here are working links [ATTACH]5744[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]5746[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]5747[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]5748[/ATTACH]
EvilBivol-1 Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 LockON is done. kaput.. nowhere'sville.. fini....stick a fork in it.... Which is exactly why it makes sense to deploy as much effort and time as possible on the creation of its replacement, instead of continually patching the dying beast. You could never patch LO enough to make it into something it isn't. I understand you want it to be better. Who doesn't? But please, stop the marketing accusations. IMO, as I've said in another thread of similar fashion, we're ALL paying customers. We ALL payed for LO. We all GOT LO. Beyond that - everything is a bonus (and ED hasn't been stingy with providing it, either). Don't confuse BUGS with FEATURES, limited as they may be. The sim was designed with certain limitations (read: realism compromises). That's what happens when you try to arrange a serious (hardcore was the word of the day) representation of 5 totally different aircraft in ONE product, coupled with a sophisticated sattelite terrain system. Not each one gets a clickable pit and an absolutely accurate avionics set. But you get enough to model certain aspects of flying dissamilar air combat and employ realistic tactics to a certain (yes, very limited) degree. Which is far beyond what any other modern jet flight sim has to offer (with a single exception, of course). Anyway, I'm ranting... - EB [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Nothing is easy. Everything takes much longer. The Parable of Jane's A-10 Forum Rules
SwingKid Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 This attitude has got me very discouraged with ED. I suggest to separate the "attitude" of ED testers and ED developers as two separate things. I think that some testers may post like this because we are upset by what we perceive to be "ED's attitude" too, and are just running dramatic comments up the flagpole hoping one of them will come along and correct us with a clarification. I do it sometimes too. Testers are often kept just as hungry for information about development plans as everybody else, mainly because ED is always adapting them to the new situation and don't know it for sure themselves. (Ref: Wags' signature) AFAIK every patch and add-on has always included at least some improvements for all flyable aircraft, especially when legitimate bugs are reported. The real attitude from ED has always been "no promises." The best way to avoid making promises is to avoid replying. And so the speculation about their motives always continues. So, don't take it too seriously - nothing is ever final. -SK
Coffee999 Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 Which is exactly why it makes sense to deploy as much effort and time as possible on the creation of its replacement, instead of continually patching the dying beast. You could never patch LO enough to make it into something it isn't. Well, the main reason a sim dies is because it NOT supported. I'm not saying the LO isn't supported at all, but can't help but think that more support, more patches LO get's the more is stays alive and profitable. Just look at F4 if you need an example.
EvilBivol-1 Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 Are you serious? Somebody had to say it... okay... let's look at F4 then. Half a decade of development time that results in an incredibly wide and deep air combat simulation, but which can barely boot without crashing and soon after gets the development company disbanded. Nice! Oh wait, you probably mean the *community* support that followed the source code leak. Another half a decade and hundreds of community developers later, sure, we have something. Well, sorry, but that is not the same cup of tea as a 12-20 member development team trying to stay in business for OUR pleasure. - EB [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Nothing is easy. Everything takes much longer. The Parable of Jane's A-10 Forum Rules
rlogue Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 I'm perfectly willing to pay for BS so long as the major f-15 bugs are worked out.. radar, missiles, nav, etc. Surely they would not charge us money for the same thing we already have ? 1
Coffee999 Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 Are you serious? Somebody had to say it... okay... let's look at F4 then. Half a decade of development time that results in an incredibly wide and deep air combat simulation, but which can barely boot without crashing and soon after gets the development company disbanded. Nice! Oh wait, you probably mean the *community* support that followed the source code leak. Another half a decade and hundreds of community developers later, sure, we have something. Well, sorry, but that is not the same cup of tea as a 12-20 member development team trying to stay in business for OUR pleasure. Well I don't know what problems YOU had with it, but like LO, the majority of the buyers get along fine with it. I know I did when I flew it. I mean the support all around with it. Developer, community, everything. Well, maybe LO's code should be released then if that's what it takes. :D
EvilBivol-1 Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 f-15 bugs ... <sigh> ... - EB [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Nothing is easy. Everything takes much longer. The Parable of Jane's A-10 Forum Rules
Coffee999 Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 I'm perfectly willing to pay for BS so long as the major f-15 bugs are worked out for .. radar, missiles, nav, etc. Surely they would charge us money for the same thing we already have ? I would pay for it too rlogue. I would certainly pay to have many fixes in the western aircraft. I would just hate to see the A10 and F15 get kicked to the dust.
tflash Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 I still feel it would be more appropriate to post a message in the bugs forum with a clear subject line (AIM-9 A-10 reticule/ F-15 HUD info) or something, then starting a flame in the general forum? Maybe for a technical sim like this we need a more formal bugs reporting procedure, where the dev team can flag reported bugs so that you can at least know if there is follow-up. But, at the end of the day, Lockon is a 2003 game which is EOL. What can we wish more than knowing a radically new sequel is being made featuring F-16 and Mig-29Someversionwhateveriftherussiansfinnalysortitout? I couldn't care less about the big reticule problem, with all respect, if this new game where to hit the market. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
EvilBivol-1 Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 Well, maybe LO's code should be released then if that's what it takes. And maybe ED should be disbanded also? And then we, the ingenious, hard-working, fair, just and benevolent flight sim community can finally get what we want, right? - EB [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Nothing is easy. Everything takes much longer. The Parable of Jane's A-10 Forum Rules
Coffee999 Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 And maybe ED should be disbanded also? And then we, the ingenious, hard-working, fair, just and benevolent flight sim community can finally get what we want, right? Did I say that? No..You are being ridiculous now. :( I WANT to see ED thrive, that's why I'm here.:mad:
Recommended Posts