In your opinion (hypothetical) what would make LOMAC more realistic?

[Oscar]

Like so?

 

Interesting video clip. What is that? Does not look like LOCKON, yet, it does. Is there more?

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Actualy you are wrong. The AMRAAM was put into service in 1991 in f-15's.

First combat Kill was in 27 December 1992 shot from an F-16 against a mig-25.

So, you’ve just said the same thing I said. However, I am somehow wrong and you are rihgt? How's that?

 

The games time frame is fictitional ranging from 80's to mid 90's hardware and the AMRAAM fits in nicely in that time frame.

You’ve just stated that AIM-120 was put in service in 1991, yet the “fictional ranging from 80’s …” is all right for you to use AIM-120 when you fly F-15? Funny … AIM-120 was not in service in 80’s.

 

Asking to remove the AMRAAM is asking for easy kills.

AMRAMM did not exist at the time the Flanker entered the service. What I am asking for is historical accuracy. Now if a game models F-15C from the early 90’s then the Flanker’s from the same era should be modeled as well.

 

The AIM-9 is uselsess in this game and the AIM-7 is more equivalent to the R-27 leaving it as the only valid weapon for the eagle.

So as it was when Flanker entered service in 1984.

 

…removing the AMRAAM would only satisfy those without talent whilling to shoot f-15's as if they were merely target drones.

Well, where all of a sudden is all those stories that it is not about the missile but about the pilot? Didn’t you say the other day how you easily killed those F-15, proving that it is all about pilot not about the machine? And BTW, AMRAAM did not exist at the time flanker entered service.

 

I can think of R-77 out of this game for lesser reasons than those you pointed out for the AMRAAM, but will you be coherent with your own arguments and want it gone? No of course not.

You are right. R-77 should not be in the game either. Or, if F-15 has ARH’s, Flankers and MiG’s should have them as well. That would perfectly satisfy the fictional timeframe ranging from 80’s to mid 90’s.

[Pilotasso]

Im am sorry that you choose to ignore half of each sentence you quoted to bring it out of context and Im also sorry that you failed to undertand, or didnt want to understand that this SIM is not about the entrance date of the flanker into service so that you should use mid 90's ER/EM missile technology and ommit the AMRAAM in the same time frame to shoot down the F-15 easely.

 

The Su-27S remains the backbone of Ukranian and Russian AF to this day, why to you impose strictly the service entry date? Can only be for your convenince Im afraid.

 

You are right. R-77 should not be in the game either. Or, if F-15 has ARH’s, Flankers and MiG’s should have them as well. That would perfectly satisfy the fictional timeframe ranging from 80’s to mid 90’s.

 

Oh now you reffer to the ommited magic words of mid 90's as well? Guess what, AMRAAM was operational back then.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Pilotasso is exactly right…

Yes, he was right that AMRAAM was entered in service in early 90’s. Now that just make my point stronger that AIM-120 did not exist at the time Flanker entered service.

 

AIM-7 was already out-performing R-27R/T!

Cool. So what?

 

So you want no AMRAAMs for the NATO side, no R-27E's for you! ;)

I want historical accuracy.

[GGTharos]

No, you want ARHs for your aircraft, not historical accuracy. You've been crying about how unfair it is to fight F-15s all this time - I'm not going to dig up your past posts to prove it, people have seen them.

 

There is no such thing as 'Historical Accuracy' in LOMAC when it comes to a time frame right now. Give it up. If you want 'historical accuracy' run a campaign with rules on your own server that will reflect correct weapons loadouts.

 

Well, tell ya what. The AMRAAM is about 3nm short on NEZ and Rmax from the real one ... the real 120B anyway, and the C's range is even longer.

 

You're playing against a fictional, poorly working AMRAAM (essentially an A model with worse seeker than the real one) so quit complaining already.

Even if you got this 'Historical Accuracy', F-15's would be outperforming the flanker's weapons, and you'd still be crying.

 

I'm sorry if this post is abrasive, but your posts are coming across as hypocritical to me personally.

[D-Scythe]

Why does this dance have to repeat itself each and every week?

[Pilotasso]

Yes, he was right that AMRAAM was entered in service in early 90’s. Now that just make my point stronger that AIM-120 did not exist at the time Flanker entered service.

 

Cool. So what?

 

I want historical accuracy.

 

 

Is that so? seems to me you change your arguments everytime I see you post, see below.

 

No, you want ARHs for your aircraft, not historical accuracy. You've been crying about how unfair it is to fight F-15s all this time - I'm not going to dig up your past posts to prove it, people have seen them.

 

I did! Didnt take too long searching for it:

 

I do, for sake of reality, agree that airplanes in Lock On are equipped with what they had (or still have) in active service.

 

What I do not understand, how did the MiG-29 ended up being able to carry R-77 and Su-27 did not? R-77 was available at the time Su-27 entered the service.

You are right. R-77 should not be in the game either. Or, if F-15 has ARH’s, Flankers and MiG’s should have them as well. That would perfectly satisfy the fictional timeframe ranging from 80’s to mid 90’s.

 

Historical accuracy? heh? Not even technicaly accurate much less chronologicaly. Neither coherent with yourself. you have changed your opinion about r-77 ingame and its service entry date twice in 3 recent posts.

Why does this dance have to repeat itself each and every week?

 

Im an observer of human behaviour and like to make people see their own contradictions. Nothing personal torwards Hadjuk. So far its been friendly.

[Guest IguanaKing]

If historical accuracy is wanted, I guess the Su-34 needs to be removed from the game. I think the T-frog would have to be removed as well. :D

[ViperEagle]

Actually, the AMRAAM did exist in the mid-late 80's, but granted, it was in developemental and testing phases. Historical accuracy doesnt really count anymore, seeing as, said before, the SU-25T and KA-50 and SU-34 etc are now included in the game(well, the KA-50 soon).

 

I'd actually put the Game (honestly) right now closer to 1996-1999. In that case, the Flanker would still not have the R-77(which it is only getting now) and the Eagle would have a much more updated radar and even longer range, better AMRAAMS of the C or C-5 model.

 

If I may be honest, if you want a Flanker than can honestly overcome an BASELINE Eagle in the BVR realm, you'd need a SU-27SM. Otherwise, the Flanker is better in some realms of WVR/BFM, but it simply cannot match in BVR.

[Reticuli]

I read this whole thread and now I have a massive headache. And I'm hungry. Anyway... I'm curious when the Su-27 and Mig-29 gained (at least) somewhat modern radar MFDs, BVR acquisition, and working multi-use TWS, not whatever you call the useless TWS in the sim carried over from the SSI Flanker sim modeling (along with a lot of other stuff in Flaming Cliffs to some people's chagrin). Anyone know? Because even late 90s early 00s export versions had such TWS and ACQ modes going on, even though it took years later for the R-77 to start getting adapted to use them. Obviously ED is not modeling the current modern hardware from the last decade (later export Su-30, recent Su-35, etc), but when did Russia finally start getting moderately modern radar and even a modicum of accompanying avionics modes and automation? I find it hard to believe the export versions were more advanced than what the Russian air force had upgraded to in any respect.

 

Also, there seems to be a lot of talk about how EW/ECM has destroyed the capability of BVR radar homing missiles outside of obviously-lopsided engagements with the very oldest and non-upgraded export aircraft, a category that's apparently been the only recorded launch platform for the critical Russian missile real-world performance stats. If none of the newer R-27 designs have seen combat, all of the legacy hardware that was fired was done from very under-equipped old legacy export aircraft, and the newer semi-passive designs are combined with very powerful radars, then would that mean they are now at an advantage over the active designs from a countermeasure standpoint since their terminal phase is not dependent on a tiny radar emitter? Or is the reducing range between the active-homing missile and the target able to compensate for that and bring active types up to the rapidly-diminishing expected average utility of radar homing missiles in general?

 

Thanks and sorry if I'm pissing anyone off for dredging up a thread. Old is not bad, and conversations can take place across long distances or long time. Peace out.

Edited August 3, 2014 by Reticuli

[Pilotasso]

holy necro batman!!

[Flagrum]

holy necro batman!!

8 years ... new record. But if it helps to make LOMAC more realistic ... why not? :D

[The_Fragger]

For me:

 

- more realistic explosions

- Clickable Cockpits for all aircrafts

[skouras]

PFM's and Clickable Cockpits for all aircrafts

[OB1]

Thanks and sorry if I'm pissing anyone off for dredging up a thread. Old is not bad, and conversations can take place across long distances or long time. Peace out.

 

Actually you bring up some good points and you didn't sound bias when you wrote it, congrats !

 

Most of the conversation in this thread is retarded, its quite obvious that all missiles need to be addressed as well as radar and ecm along with aircraft functionality. Period.

To be biased and say only one side needs improvement is just trolling.

 

This thread is a great display on lack of knowledge and guess work as it is almost impossible to get accurate data on how everything in question is supposed to behave/perform with X platforms/systems.

[Flagrum]

In all seriousness, how relevant is this thread about LOMAC(!!!) these days? I feel as if I miss something important, but whatever was discussed here eight(!!!) years ago can't really be relevant today anymore? LOMAC is no longer being maintained by ED and whatever features that were carried over to DCS have now evolved for years since the last posting in this thread.