ED future plans about air to air

[TorwaK]

So, before v1.13 patch some people published that Lock-On is dead already. I hope ED remembers something that this community is exist due to Lock-On fans and its supporters. When BS will be released not all people are going to start playing BS or DCS modules.

 

In consequence personally I expect some explanation from ED about their future plans about air to air war projects. Thanks.

[Pilotasso]

EvilBivol made a misterious apearence last friday if my memory doesnt fail, that something for LOMAC would be announced within days. I have no Idea what that will be, logic tells me it could be 1.13 patch but then again they also repeatedly said it was still soon to speak about it, so I dont realy know and we rest to wait to see what that announcement will be.

[RvETito]

Though I hate to admit it but I'm not holding my breath for any news about Lock On soon. Hope to be proved wrong.

[tacit_blue]

@TorwaK

Yes, I agree....something has to come now for LOFC!!

[SwingKid]

Hey tacit_blue,

 

do you know where I could get schematic drawings of such aircraft as E-3, RC- and KC-135?

 

-SK

[Outlaw24]

Did ED ever confirm that there would be a patch v1.13? I know it was under consideration.

[Pilotasso]

I think if you read the posts above you wouldnt have to ask that question to us, just wait.

[Guest Crazy_Eyes]

So, before v1.13 patch some people published that Lock-On is dead already. I hope ED remembers something that this community is exist due to Lock-On fans and its supporters. When BS will be released not all people are going to start playing BS or DCS modules.

 

In consequence personally I expect some explanation from ED about their future plans about air to air war projects. Thanks.

 

Torwak if I've been led to understand correctly, it will be 3 years before any fast movers are released in DCS, I would also like ED to release some information regarding DCS's futre content, and LO:FC 1.13, But I'm afraid that's just not going to happen IMHO.

 

I'm not flaming ED but IMHO I find ED's approach to the vast majority of its customer base which are predominantly A2A fans, extremely arogant.

[159th_Viper]

....to the vast majority of its customer base which are predominantly A2A fans....

 

 

 

And on what do you base that assumption?

 

Just Curious, is all :)

[Force_Feedback]

The fans are arrogant as well, so no pun there ;)

[Pilotasso]

I dont think we are mostly AA fans, I just think if we were given multirole aircraft most of people would do AA and AG in the same mission. I know I would. Cluster bombs on the aircraft parked at bases...yummy yummy. :D

[EvilBivol-1]

EvilBivol made a misterious apearence last friday if my memory doesnt fail, that something for LOMAC would be announced within days. I have no Idea what that will be, logic tells me it could be 1.13 patch but then again they also repeatedly said it was still soon to speak about it, so I dont realy know and we rest to wait to see what that announcement will be.

Eh? Sorry, must've been some kind of missunderstanding.

 

The word on 1.13 remains the same - ED hopes to be able to do it when more resources are available. Sorry, I know that to many of you that line is all too familiar now, but the subject keep coming up, so we have to keep repeating it.

 

Beyond a possible 1.13, I would have no expectation that ED will continue further development of Lock On. However, they will continue to provide support with the website and forum, as well as potentially provide greater opportunities for modders to access the game.

 

To answer the original question about ED's plans for A2A combat, there is nothing preventing fighters or multirole aircraft from being featured in future DCS modules. So far, the first two addons are known, beyond that everthing is pretty much fair game at this point. Personally speaking, my own expectation is that the third module will also be a CAS aircraft for the Russian side, to round out of the A2G mix, afterwhich we may see a return to A2A or even multirole aircraft. However, this is just a guess and what happens in reality depends less on what we or even ED themselves want to do and more on what they can do based on available information and what makes best use of company resources (i.e. if they get a military contract for a particular aircraft, chances are that will be the one to come next for DCS as well, etc.)

[SwingKid]

Good post.

 

Personally speaking, my own expectation is that the third module will also be a CAS aircraft for the Russian side, to round out of the A2G mix,

 

Does this imply that we'd still to be flying in the Caucasus after so many years? Neither Syria nor China have fixed-wing "CAS aircraft for the Russian side." The best time for the Su-25 is now.

 

-SK

[TorwaK]

To answer the original question about ED's plans for A2A combat, there is nothing preventing fighters or multirole aircraft from being featured in future DCS modules. So far, the first two addons are known, beyond that everthing is pretty much fair game at this point. Personally speaking, my own expectation is that the third module will also be a CAS aircraft for the Russian side, to round out of the A2G mix, afterwhich we may see a return to A2A or even multirole aircraft. However, this is just a guess and what happens in reality depends less on what we or even ED themselves want to do and more on what they can do based on available information and what makes best use of company resources (i.e. if they get a military contract for a particular aircraft, chances are that will be the one to come next for DCS as well, etc.)

 

As I know ED is working on new 3D models like Su-27, Su-25 and so on. Those new models are going to publish with v1.13 or we have to wait DCS: Black Shark module to be reunited with them? As I heard there is some kind of copyright (UBI) problems to add them into new patch, is that true?

 

Thanks for your attention.

[Pilotasso]

well then I must have dreamed awake... :huh:

[Outlaw24]

well then I must have dreamed awake... :huh:

 

;)

[SoaringEagle74]

Due to current computer limitations and abundance of classified material on "cutting edge" stuff there are limits to what realistically can be improved in this game and future simulations. My P4 3.0Ghz laptop with 128MB Ati graphics card and 1GB ram is already pressed to the limit and all my graphical settings are set to medium...just imagine lower end systems!

 

What I would really like to see in future sims is more multirole aircraft, more infantry units(currently there NONE), and perhaps one or more additional theatre of wars. IMO these areas are severly lacking!

 

As far as improving this particular game I don't think anything can be done without risking overkill with the obvious exception of fixing any potential undiscovered bugs in follow up patches. This should NOT be taken lightely as customers paid money and rightfuly demand the best!

 

Just my two cents.

[192nd_Erdem]

IMO Lock-On engine will be greatly outdated when that fourth "mysterious" aircraft appears.

 

Your best bet for A2A is a completely new simulation from ED, on a new engine. Which I think has some clear 5-6 years to come.

[7rooper]

Simulation developments take serious time....

[TorwaK]

well then I must have dreamed awake... :huh:

 

As I heard if ED publishes those new 3D models with the patch, they can't use them with DCS modules anymore because of ownership will pass to UBI. Anyway I hope to import the new 3d models to Lock-On by 3rd part programs.

[Guest Crazy_Eyes]

And on what do you base that assumption?

 

Just Curious, is all :)

 

of 24 people on the RAF server last night just 2 People just were flying A2G

[leafer]

of 24 people on the RAF server last night just 2 People just were flying A2G

 

I bet if those twenty-four people had a choice of one helo, with AFM and whatnot to fly, you would have had two people flying fast movers.

[159th_Viper]

of 24 people on the RAF server last night just 2 People just were flying A2G

 

Well, with the unstructured nature of Online Hyperlobby Flights/Missions (AirQuake) the Mortality rate of Ground-Pounders makes it no fun to climb into a Mudmover in Hyperlobby.

 

A good exeption to this rule is where the mission is specifically designed to cater for the Mudmovers and give them more of a fighting chance - here 3SQN server does well. In any event, if you're alone up there in a Frog it's either RTB or hide - only a matter of time till your numbers up unless you have structured Fighter Support.

 

Coupled with the fact that the online Community is I dare say but a fraction of the Fan-Base of LockOn i think that the Hyperlobby figures might just be a tad unrepresenative/Inaccurate ;)

[grandsurf]

of 24 people on the RAF server last night just 2 People just were flying A2G

 

I am sure that this will soon be more than offset.

 

Good Post EvilBivol-1!

[Guest Crazy_Eyes]

Guys LOMAC is predominantly fast movers, I've been on the 3SQN server quite alot of times and a vast majority of players there are also A2A like easily 90-95%, Whilst there is a large A2G fanbase on LO there is a much larger A2A fanbase.

 

There is only 1 true dedicated A2G which is the A2G TUAF server on HL and that's empty a majority of the time, it is a very good A2G map too, well planned and plenty of targets, The only people I see flying on this server a majority of the time is the TUAF themselves.

 

I can not comment on offline players because I have no stats or evidence, alot of people seem confident there are alot more offline A2G players, is it possible to get any information regarding the offline stats?, the only hard evidence I have is the online server stats which state A2A is by far more popular than A2G.

 

*Edited for typo