The start of a revolution for LOMAC??

[Pilotasso]

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

 

 

LOL what?! it has been done before ingame... LOL to yourself that you didnt know! :P

[AndyHill]

Wait a minute, would it be possible to create new cockpits for the existing planes? If so is someone already working on them? If not, why?

 

_________________________________________________________________

Lock on MUST have a dynamic campaign engine with multiplayer capability AND toe-brakes with differential braking

[SuperKungFu]

i don't think so about the cockpit. It has been stated before the cockpits are hard coded so we can't touch that.

[Pilotasso]

i don't think so about the cockpit. It has been stated before the cockpits are hard coded so we can't touch that.

I think I remenber theres editable text files where you can specify cockpits per flyable plane, and I suspect you can make new cockpits but there wont be any working instruments in them.

 

I have thought about making an armed MD-500 helicopter pit for black shark since its aiming methods are crude and consist in a fixed aiming sight, fixed guns a 2 rockets pods only. Could be fun for drug busting missions. Remenber the A team? :D

 

"Murdoc you foooal! I aint gonna flyyyyyyyyyyyy aaaaa eeerrr zzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzz"

[Weta43]

KnellKnell posted: "- In the future we can have some total conversion mod ( only restriction is to put same generation aircraft to stick with FM ) ( May be ED will release a tool to tweak the non use FM ? )"

 

KnellKnell, I think FM tweaks are a bad idea unless they can come up with some fool proof (& Genius proof) way of keeping them off-line...

 

Things that look like UFO's on your own screen, but that fly (& attack) online the same as an F-15 (or Su-33) are one thing, UFO's that fly like UFO's are another.

[AndyHill]

IF the cockpits are indeed 3d objects that can be replaced AND if the hard coding only means the displays, gauges etc. so that if the new cockpit has the same dimensions as the old one they'll work properly they MIGHT be replaceable. This in turn might lead to 6DOF working properly in every flyable plane. Could be nice. Maybe worth some research.

 

__________________________________________________________________

Lock on MUST have a dynamic campaign with multiplayer support, differential braking for toe-brakes AND new 6DOF cockpits for every flyable

[SuperKungFu]

damn right when i press submit on my last post my internet crashed, so I'm sorry if i created a double post. Anyway, has anyone created a static object and added it into the game. One guy brought up a cool idea for a testing ramp on the runway. It was used to test the ski-jump on the Russian aircraft carriers for the su-33...etc. It would be cool if we can add that on the runway for our testing purposes. I would also like to see when we hit the static object (ski-jump), would we go smoothly and fly, or possibly go through it, or explode the second we hit it.

[Cosmonaut]

damn right when i press submit on my last post my internet crashed, so I'm sorry if i created a double post. Anyway, has anyone created a static object and added it into the game. One guy brought up a cool idea for a testing ramp on the runway. It was used to test the ski-jump on the Russian aircraft carriers for the su-33...etc. It would be cool if we can add that on the runway for our testing purposes. I would also like to see when we hit the static object (ski-jump), would we go smoothly and fly, or possibly go through it, or explode the second we hit it.

 

Yeah that would be cool.

 

[SuperKungFu]

yea Cosmonaut got the idea, thanks for the pics!

[ALDEGA]

The ramp idea doesn't seem to work.

I created a very simple one, with a slope of maybe 10°. (replacing the comcenter.lom file)

 

Maybe I did something wrong, but my Su-25T goes up in flames, even when driving very slowly.

[knellknell]

Sorry, wrong topic :)

[SuperKungFu]

I created a very simple one, with a slope of maybe 10°. (replacing the comcenter.lom file)

 

yea that's what i was wondering, so i guess it has to be really smooth. Does anyone know the slope of the russian aircraft carrier's ramp in the game?

[Trident]

I don't think it's the smoothness, a normal static object just does that no matter how careful you are (Ever tried to land on a bridge in LOMAC? I have, and I couldn't seem to touch down without exploding, same thing when you try to touch&go on a building roof). Luckily, there are atleast 2 objects in LOMAC which are different, namely the Kuznetsov and the Vinson. Maybe they can be modified so one can put them on dry land and then be replaced by the ramp model (it could also be a good idea to make the model include not only the ski-jump itself but also the flat ground infront of it)?

 

EDIT: IIRC the *final* angle of the ramp on the Kuznetsov is something between 12 and 15 degrees. Now, the ramp is curved, but the Kuznetsov model in-game only uses something like 3 flat surfaces to represent this, so I don't think those 10 degrees were causing the problem.

[Vekkinho]

Hi,

 

OK guys let's be reasonable and conclude that the main reason we got those tools from Eagle Dynamics is end user customization Lock On and Flaming Cliffs. Right?!

 

This means that all of you who expect something new from Black Shark like new airplane, ship, building or a vehicle can create your own item of interest. This way you can add anything you want and adjust your Lock On any way you want it.

 

People from ED read these forums but they cannot promise and make everything you (we) want. There's millions of LO/FC users out there and billions of requests....So if you want MiG-1.44 in BS go ahead - build your own.

 

Apart from flyable helo and upgraded LOD on many vehicles I doubt there's gonna be any major improvements in BS compared to Flaming Cliffs. I doubt we'll get Su-37, Su-47, MiG-29M, F-15E, A-6 or any new model, especially flyable. I hoped we'd have MiG-29K since it's code is already within the game, but let's face it:

- Russia gave up on MiG-29K developement, they use Su-33 as their Carrier based Fighter and Fast Mover and only India (country that 's not featured in LO:FC) operates Naval Fulcrum. MiG-29K used to fall apart while snaggin' the wire, it's airframe doesn't satisfy for Carrier Ops.

- Russia also gave up on MiG-1.44 and Su-47. They are more concerned on producing and selling Su-30 MKI and MKK to China and India (major Sukhoi operators in the world today).

 

So, my conclusion is that BS will provide us with nothing but a helo with a lot of eye-candy (LOD). It just might burden our CPUs, GPUs and RAM.

 

But there's another thing, though!

- For modelling a helo, ED needed to work extensively on VTOL. I'd be a shame to use it just for a Ka-52, they should introduce a Harrier or a Yak-38/141 in some future addon (e.g. BS 1.21) or make a flyable adversary (Apache or Commanche). Remember Enemy Engaged series? We also had Georgian theatre there!

 

We all feel that LO inventory needs a modernization:

- Our current inventory belongs to mid eightees (introduction of Su-27, Black Sea trials with Su-27K and trials with MiG-29S). In FC we still have flyable Su-27 that's basic model of Flanker series. Upgrading to a Su-27SK is blood, sweat and tears as it has 3 MFD with terrain following radar that has to be hard coded and severely tested before introduced. I seriously doubt any chance of it with BS.

 

So with these tools you can help yourself in case ED mismatched your expectations with Black Shark. Just add whatever you want over default ''obsolete'' aircraft.

 

Knell made a great models of Mirage F1 and IV. He's also working on a Rafale! Alfa imported new submarines. I'd like to know (ED read this please) how can I unlock models present in LO/FC but not visible in game (MiG-29K, F-111, all those ships you're talking about).

 

Now, why I ask?

- I thought of replacing Pyotr Velki with some French aircraft carrier and MiG-29K with Rafale Navale. This way we'd have fully operational Rafale capable of Carrier Ops that's similar in size to MiG-29K. And it's fully operational compared to MiG-29K. The other thing is how can we create new slots in France (one for Carrier,other for Rafale) without replacing existing ones?

I remember Poland mod used to steal away MiG-29A slots from Russia. I don't wanna do that! I want new slots for modifications!

 

So I kindly suggest ED to grant us with new slots in BS or to describe how can we free up hidden models in order to redesignate them with new models without installing Navy Supermod or such mods?!

 

If ED guys and girls can prove me wrong and release something beside a helo, something like optimized engine capable of 50 FPS on mediocre computers or new or modernized airplane I'd be glad.

 

So ED - I dare you politely!

 

Vedran Colak.

[Vekkinho]

Oh, yes Alfa: Any chance of releasing subs in form of Loman addons?!

[SuperKungFu]

Any chance of releasing subs in form of Loman addons?!

 

those subs are payware so he can't release it otherwise its against copyright laws. It's just there for your eye candy.

[Vekkinho]

But he could model one after the one he bought. That's legal!

[SuperKungFu]

yea sure if you build one then yea it will be legal, I'm just saying the two that he showed was from the gunpoint website so he can't release those. There are other free models, like i got a USS ohio class.

[Pilotasso]

Nothing like doing your own... ;)

 

Guess what this is.

[Disso]

those subs are payware so he can't release it otherwise its against copyright laws. It's just there for your eye candy.

 

Wrong, actually, he Could release those models, since he bought them, he is entitled to through the copyright which allows him to use it in a game, as long as the files are no longer editable.

 

http://forum.lockon.ru/showpost.php?p=238166&postcount=82

 

http://forum.lockon.ru/showpost.php?p=238170&postcount=85

[SuperKungFu]

oh right, forgot that the .lom files can't be converted back to .3ds file or whatever. Then i guess it would be possible.

[Colt40Five]

I thought of something really sick that's sure to drive the hardcores insane...

 

Total conversion, like mechs for ground vehicles, macross veritechs for fighters...something crazy for the carrier and other naval vessels. I mean since you can only change visual things might as well have fun with it.

 

Is there a large Japanese lomac following by any chance???

[Stealth_HR]

Hi,

 

OK guys let's be reasonable and conclude that the main reason we got those tools from Eagle Dynamics is end user customization Lock On and Flaming Cliffs. Right?!

I for one would certainly hope so. As someone who's spent several years modding FreeSpace and X2 - The Threat (both flight games in their own right, one with a friendly and one with an extremely unfriendly modability level), I'm glad to see the tools slowly released to us "common forum denizens here".

 

People from ED read these forums but they cannot promise and make everything you (we) want. There's millions of LO/FC users out there and billions of requests....So if you want MiG-1.44 in BS go ahead - build your own.

The general point here is true. For each user let there be a dozen ideas and you've already got too many for a single team to handle. Modders usually come in once the deal is over and done to start adding completely new, unprecedented content - compare with the Hard Light Productions, home to the FreeSpace Source Code Project which has revamped the source code from DirectX5 to DirectX8, enabled a lot of hidden and even instated some new functions in order to keep that 1999 title lasting and still playable. Clearly, a lot could've, and has been done.

 

The same should, in my honest opinion, be true for the Lock On series as well. As we've all seen in Flaming Cliffs, a lot can be changed - the Su-25T differs in so many ways from the previous flyables it's insane. The all-new HUD, the TVM, the Sukhogruz (which, if I'm right, didn't appear on any plane in vanilla LO, flyable or not), the AFM for the Su-25x series - all that was coded in. Naturally, I can't expect ED to release the source code to us, as they have to live off something. However, a couple of things could be made more mod-friendly so we'd have a longer-lasting sim on our hands, and to make it even more playable than before.

 

But there's another thing, though!

- For modelling a helo, ED needed to work extensively on VTOL. I'd be a shame to use it just for a Ka-52, they should introduce a Harrier or a Yak-38/141 in some future addon (e.g. BS 1.21) or make a flyable adversary (Apache or Commanche). Remember Enemy Engaged series? We also had Georgian theatre there!

Here's an example of something that's almost too good to be left alone. Considering how hard it is to change attributes on planes, such as wing folding, wing sweep, carrier takeoff and arresting hook capability, giving the average modder the ability to either create realistic variants of planes or completely fictional ones would be a godsend - how many people would like to, say, try to launch a Tornado off the ship? Or be able to sweep wings on it? Or try what a VTOL Su-25 would feel like? Obviously, the examples here are downright silly, but I believe I speak for a lot of modders when I say a more organized set of configuration files would really help people have more fun with the game. That, or a set of some explanatory manuals.

 

We all feel that LO inventory needs a modernization:

- Our current inventory belongs to mid eightees (introduction of Su-27, Black Sea trials with Su-27K and trials with MiG-29S). In FC we still have flyable Su-27 that's basic model of Flanker series. Upgrading to a Su-27SK is blood, sweat and tears as it has 3 MFD with terrain following radar that has to be hard coded and severely tested before introduced. I seriously doubt any chance of it with BS.

 

So with these tools you can help yourself in case ED mismatched your expectations with Black Shark. Just add whatever you want over default ''obsolete'' aircraft.

 

Knell made a great models of Mirage F1 and IV. He's also working on a Rafale! Alfa imported new submarines. I'd like to know (ED read this please) how can I unlock models present in LO/FC but not visible in game (MiG-29K, F-111, all those ships you're talking about).

 

This is something that would be somewhat amended by even more released tools - or whichever game is next series after LO. Yes, there are a lot of gripes with the current set of planes - for one, because we've got a healthy mix of planes and models from the 70s till the 90s, but with some missing links like Harriers, Jaguars, MiG-21s, early Mirage models... One of the things that have been pointed out by our modmakers so far (and verified personally) is that Lock On has a lot of residue material from Flanker 2.5 - and a lot of it is unused. Now, what would make sense to me (and to other modders, I assume) would be to let us know what's garbage and what's usable - and how we can use it to either reactivate what's in there or replace with something. Even having free slots would help since the load times would go down a bit, in all reality.

 

The same would go for weaponry (which is, really, almost fully listed), ground object, ship, skin and other slots. I'm pretty sure the Lock On engine is advanced enough to handle more than just what we got with the game - the Su-25T skins are expandable, so why not anything else?

 

So I kindly suggest ED to grant us with new slots in BS or to describe how can we free up hidden models in order to redesignate them with new models without installing Navy Supermod or such mods?!

 

If ED guys and girls can prove me wrong and release something beside a helo, something like optimized engine capable of 50 FPS on mediocre computers or new or modernized airplane I'd be glad.

 

So ED - I dare you politely!

 

This was just quoted for truth and emphasis. The game's great, otherwise, I probably wouldn't be here. But it'd make life and playing a lot easier if the modability factor was just that bit higher. I'm thankful for the tools released and for the ones to come, if there will be anymore, and I hope the released tools (and possibly the addition of Black Shark) will unlock the world for both modders and end-players.

 

Regards,

 

-- Boris Matesin

 

 

(p.s. shader editing would be good - if only for the engine smoke) :thumbup:

[chrno120]

So, is it now possible to replace the MiG-29K & F-111 with more modern 3d models in the game?

[Alfa]

 

I hoped we'd have MiG-29K since it's code is already within the game...

 

I made a mod long ago importing it back into Lock-on. It works very well as AI-entry, but the main snag at the time was the low detail level of the MiG-29K model from Flanker - with the release of the plug-in for 3DS Max there is a host of new possibilities ;)

 

Russia gave up on MiG-29K developement, they use Su-33 as their Carrier based Fighter and Fast Mover and only India (country that 's not featured in LO:FC) operates Naval Fulcrum. MiG-29K used to fall apart while snaggin' the wire, it's airframe doesn't satisfy for Carrier Ops.

 

Vekkinho.....that is just complete nonsense! :D .

 

No MiG-29K prototype has ever "fallen apart while snaggin' the wire" - there were only two MiG-29K prototypes ever(bort # 311 and # 312) and both of them are still around:

 

Bort # 311:

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0658020/L/

photo by Riabsev - taken at Zhukovsky in 2004

 

Bort # 312:

http://maks.sukhoi.ru/media/photo/maks2003/maks2003d3175.jpg

photo from Sukhoi.ru - taken at Zhukovsky in 2003(MAKS-03)

 

The MiG-29K did in fact pass its state acceptance trials along with the Su-33 and was ordered for production in 1991(!). However, the collapse of the Soviet Union meant that funding for its induction ceased up and the production order was suspended. However, RSK MIG continiued the MiG-29K development, which is why they are able to offer the type to the Indian navy.....and no they don't operate it yet. They have ordered 12 units of the MiG-29K(9-41) + 4 units of the MiG-29KUB(9-47) which are scheduled for delivery next year(2007).

 

The only accident involving a MiG-29K prototype(# 311) was due to something entirely different(and stupid) ;) - namely that the test pilot accidently raised the gear while the aircraft was on the deck of the carrier.....causing the aircraft to fall flat on its belly and damage the gear in the process. But, as you can see from the above photo link, it was repaired :) .

 

So, my conclusion is that BS will provide us with nothing but a helo with a lot of eye-candy (LOD). It just might burden our CPUs, GPUs and RAM.

 

[headshake]

 

But there's another thing, though!

- For modelling a helo, ED needed to work extensively on VTOL. I'd be a shame to use it just for a Ka-52, they should introduce a Harrier or a Yak-38/141 in some future addon (e.g. BS 1.21) or make a flyable adversary (Apache or Commanche). Remember Enemy Engaged series? We also had Georgian theatre there!

 

a). the helicopter in question for Black Shark is the Ka-50 single-seater version.

 

b). how in gods name do the development of helicopter flight dynamics/flight controls relate to VSTOL fighters?

 

c). unlike the MiG-29K, the development of the Yak-141 never reached anyway near production stage - the development was suspended during early flight testing and never resumed. The Yak-38 has long since been retired from service(late eighties IIRC), so none of those two entities would qualify for your earlier in-service or time-frame arguments.

 

 

We all feel that LO inventory needs a modernization:

- Our current inventory belongs to mid eightees (introduction of Su-27, Black Sea trials with Su-27K and trials with MiG-29S). In FC we still have flyable Su-27 that's basic model of Flanker series.

 

There is no specific time frame in Lock-on, but to the extend you could derrive one, it would be mid- to late nineties.....apart from the fact that countries like Georgia, Ukraine and Russia didn't exist as independant entities prior to 1991, there are several units in Lock-on that didn't exist prior to that either.

 

Upgrading to a Su-27SK is blood, sweat and tears..

 

The Su-27 version in Lock-on(V1.1) is the Su-27S - "Su-27SK" is the export designation for it, and therefore it is all but identical to what we have now.

 

...as it has 3 MFD with terrain following radar that has to be hard coded and severely tested before introduced. I seriously doubt any chance of it with BS.

 

...again the Su-27SK has neither terrain following a2g radar modes nor 3 MFDs - you are thinking of the Su-27SM upgrade.....and no there is no chance of seeing that in Black Shark :) .

 

Knell made a great models of Mirage F1 and IV. He's also working on a Rafale! Alfa imported new submarines. I'd like to know (ED read this please) how can I unlock models present in LO/FC but not visible in game (MiG-29K, F-111, all those ships you're talking about).

 

You can download the mods I made:

 

* MiG-29K mod for V1.02: http://www.279kiap.dk/installers/279_KIAP.exe

 

* F-111 mod for V1.1: http://www.279kiap.dk/installers/F-111_V1.1.exe

 

......and see for yourself :) .

 

 

Now, why I ask?

- I thought of replacing Pyotr Velki with some French aircraft carrier and MiG-29K with Rafale Navale. This way we'd have fully operational Rafale capable of Carrier Ops that's similar in size to MiG-29K. And it's fully operational compared to MiG-29K. The other thing is how can we create new slots in France (one for Carrier,other for Rafale) without replacing existing ones?

I remember Poland mod used to steal away MiG-29A slots from Russia. I don't wanna do that! I want new slots for modifications!

 

You *cannot* add new aircraft entries - whatever your mod, you need to use existing entries for it. Only static objects can be added .

 

So I kindly suggest ED to grant us with new slots in BS...

 

"new slots" as you call it for active units would mean having to code FMs for them - it is not something you can just "add" :) . Static objects do not require any "behaviour" code, which is why you can add new ones of those.

 

...or to describe how can we free up hidden models in order to redesignate them with new models without installing Navy Supermod or such mods?!

 

Figure it out yourself - we did......that's what "modding" is all about ;) .

 

If ED guys and girls can prove me wrong and release something beside a helo, something like optimized engine capable of 50 FPS on mediocre computers or new or modernized airplane I'd be glad.

 

LOL...

 

Cheers,

- JJ.