LRM 2.0 Released!

[RvEYoda]

Sorry guys but LRM radar scripts are not realistic. They try to mimic something real systems would do but they don't it in the same way. For exampe, if Yoda states real radar requires some time to actually lock contact (in lockon this happens instantly you press lock), which I am not questioning... but LRM makes it so when you press lock, it wuold lock him then unlock, then second or so later it would lock the target again... so this LRM 'feature' is not realistic and is not how real system works... not gonna mention anything else... I think one example is enough.

 

What do you think a sim is Kuky?

You try your best to achieve as much realism as possible. Every sim and any engineered

system in any real life invention makes one thing: Estimations. You say "I need this value/System

accurate within X % for system Y to work". The same thing for sims. You don't make a "100% realistic

sim", cause that is not possible. You make a sim, and you decide to what degree of realism should I make this. Should I decide not to implement an important system in the main fighting system - radars,

just because i cannot make one button green for you? You know what a lock

is in a game Kuky? It's a state of ingame variables, if these variables match a certain pattern,

then the game may decide to draw a box in your HUD! Oh no, they dont say "Radar" on them.

Oh they are not realistic cause it doesn't have "Made in Moscow" on them.

It is made by someoen you don't like, then you must say he does it wrong.

Go troll somewhere else.

 

Moreover, the feature btw you are talking about is not a part of

the official released LRM. If you decide yourself (which i strongly discourage)

to use such an experimental feature, then that's entirely up to you.

 

It's slander to tell others to dislike one product for

failing to meet your standards for a feature which it does not even officially support.

Maybe you should call the maker of your car useless cause they don't include support

for driving on water. I'm sick of your 3sqn throwing nonsense and lies about things I do

just cause you don't think the green button is big enough. If you don't like the product,

don't use it, but don't say crap stuff about it that isn't true.

 

Oh do you want to know who first requested such a feature?

Two Russian flanker pilots.

 

Why was it not made part of official LRM then?

- Cause it would generate a large performance drop to make users not see a single frame blip.

(There is an unofficial version with of feature, which generates a one frame blip)

 

Next thing I will hear is "we don't like LRM, you should hate it to, it steals my credit cards".

Edited July 1, 2009 by =RvE=Yoda

[Kuky]

Easy Yoda, don't say my post is trolling because it isn't, I am just stating one fact. And you know what... just because you are a programmer, or you know how to do progarmming and make scripts like this does not make you an expert in fighter avionincs (and in this case nor just for multiple aircrafts but also aircraft from different countries which are essentially keeping secrets from each other for decades).

 

Also just a side note, I wonder how realistics you think your scripting is because I know of a real pilot who says your script is not realstics.

 

I still though thing some features are nice and good for gameplay but then again I was worried the script makes game unstable for me and feq others, which is why we decided not to have it running on our server (most still feel there are few very nice features we might try again if we feel LRM is not making game unstable).

 

So anyway, please don't call me a troll... it is not nice... and would be good to be bit less defensive when someone says they don't like what you are doing.

[RvEYoda]

Easy Yoda, don't say my post is trolling because it isn't, I am just stating one fact. And you know what... just because you are a programmer, or you know how to do progarmming and make scripts like this does not make you an expert in fighter avionincs (and in this case nor just for multiple aircrafts but also aircraft from different countries which are essentially keeping secrets from each other for decades).

 

Also just a side note, I wonder how realistics you think your scripting is because I know of a real pilot who says your script is not realstics.

 

I still though thing some features are nice and good for gameplay but then again I was worried the script makes game unstable for me and feq others, which is why we decided not to have it running on our server (most still feel there are few very nice features we might try again if we feel LRM is not making game unstable).

 

So anyway, please don't call me a troll... it is not nice... and would be good to be bit less defensive when someone says they don't like what you are doing.

 

Dont say LRM is bad becaue of a feature it doesnt use. You are not stating a fact.

You are saying LRM is bad, dont use it, because of something it doesn't use.

 

How can you expect to make people happy like this, not to make them get angry?

 

*I don't like your product* " ok. Don't use it"

*I dont like your product because it doesnt work when doing X* "My product isnt made for doing X!"

*I don't like your product, it doesnt matter how well it does things, cause it doesnt do X well,

others should listen to me becaue X in this product sucks*

"It's not meant to do X"

- Do you see the difference?

 

Besides. Tell me what you find so unrealistic. Give me a concrete idea, what does your

pilot think is bad? You say LRM is more unrealistic than normal lockon, tell me in what ways

it would be so please.

Cause we have spoken to so many fighter pilots now about this, and every single one I have

been in touch with has said the same. The results of LRM provide a significant improvement in realism.

Edited July 1, 2009 by =RvE=Yoda

[Kuky]

Well, like I said in my first post, the real radar does not lock/unlock/waits/locks a contact... this is what LRM script does, and I did not mention anything else in there. You then straight away have a go at me calling me a troll.

 

On that, what does real pilot says thing, I can't say, I know real systems of aircraft in service are clasified and real figher pilots are not in liberty to share their information, otherwise there would be no need for spies.

[Kuky]

Oh and also, like I said, we took of LRM of the 3sqn server not because we thing is garbage but because we wanted to test if game stability would change, but I have to admit that probably most people would think it's crap because of the way they are used to play and with LRM their thinking of how things are suposed to be is changed.

[RvEYoda]

Well, like I said in my first post, the real radar does not lock/unlock/waits/locks a contact... this is what LRM script does,

 

LRM official released script does not do this.

If you include any experimental functions they are stated they are there

for testing and you can enable them at your own risk only. None of the LRM servers in HL

use these experiment features. They are not part of LRM, as you can also see

in the feature diagram of lrm.

 

As I said before that what you are referring to was left out of official LRM since it gave

undesired effects.

 

Kuky: If you want to use it on your server or not is none of my business, and in this thread

it is none of my interest. I'm just wondering why you are saying LRM does something to your radar

which is not included in LRM. Why did you explicitly enable an experiment function?

 

from lrm code :

 

   -- Experimental features
   NoETmaddog                    = false
   NoAmraamMaddog                = false
   AmraamLaunchSpacing                = false
   UsingSTTDelay                    = false
   F15_F22_mod                    = false -- Who knows what this does?

 

LRM config file : LEAVE THESE OFF. I told every admin in HL. if you turn them on, it is at your own risk

Edited July 1, 2009 by =RvE=Yoda

[Kuky]

Well alright, so it's experimental feature, but it's still scripted by LRM. This is just an example of what I find not realistic.

 

I'm not gonna go into what my real pilot thinks, I just said that he thinks radar scripts are not realistic. he said the F-15 IFF is good but that's it. Sorry to say but this is what he said. It could well be he might be bit biased because parts of LRM (experimental) features are for russian aircraft and he does not fly them so not gonna say these are wrong.

 

damn, now I lost my train of thoughts :)

 

oh, got it... for the same of argument on LRM features which you say I don't like, I have one other example. It crossed my mind now things I read on the net about Indian MiG-21's that use Izraeli jammers and radar I think... how they could not be detected untill the MiG-21's were already veru close. Makes me wonder how realstic your judgement is in guessing how the real ECM/ECCm works. I assume that if you are right and aircraft that have ECm on could still have their range judged by the radar processing, then why wound't real pilots, like in example of these MiG-21's, be able to judge their enemy distance?

 

I remember you saying that the change of angle of the bugged contact, while jamming, could be estimated with trigonometry and rate if this angle change. I said that the rate of change at any greated range beyond WVR is so small there is no way to do this.

 

So in short, there is you who thinks and staes that this estimation is possible and real. My logic says it's not... and there you have discrepancy in opinions which brings out the argument wether LRM is right in this regard or not.

 

Now if in case for example, my opinion wuold be right, it brings out straight away question on how many, if any, other things you assumed are correct, are not. You see my point?

[RvEYoda]

Well alright, so it's experimental feature, but it's still scripted by LRM. This is just an example of what I find not realistic.

 

I'm not gonna go into what my real pilot thinks, I just said that he thinks radar scripts are not realistic. he said the F-15 IFF is good but that's it. Sorry to say but this is what he said. It could well be he might be bit biased because parts of LRM (experimental) features are for russian aircraft and he does not fly them so not gonna say these are wrong.

 

damn, now I lost my train of thoughts :)

 

oh, got it... for the same of argument on LRM features which you say I don't like, I have one other example. It crossed my mind now things I read on the net about Indian MiG-21's that use Izraeli jammers and radar I think... how they could not be detected untill the MiG-21's were already veru close. Makes me wonder how realstic your judgement is in guessing how the real ECM/ECCm works. I assume that if you are right and aircraft that have ECm on could still have their range judged by the radar processing, then why wound't real pilots, like in example of these MiG-21's, be able to judge their enemy distance?

 

I remember you saying that the change of angle of the bugged contact, while jamming, could be estimated with trigonometry and rate if this angle change. I said that the rate of change at any greated range beyond WVR is so small there is no way to do this.

 

So in short, there is you who thinks and staes that this estimation is possible and real. My logic says it's not... and there you have discrepancy in opinions which brings out the argument wether LRM is right in this regard or not.

 

Now if in case for example, my opinion wuold be right, it brings out straight away question on how many, if any, other things you assumed are correct, are not. You see my point?

 

it's an experimental feature.

NOT an experimental feature part of LRM.

It is OFF by DEFAULT and should stay such.

They are in the same file for testing. This is not part of LRM.

I repeat 5 th time, not part of lrm :P

LRM admins can experiment with them, they need to be in this file, since

they rely on LRM variables and data.

 

For ECM lockon has noise jammers.

Modern a2a fighter AC do have a lot more advanced ECM than just

"hello somewhere around here I am" noise. ED has made one model

for ECM, I have made another. Also realize that the "jumping range" you see

need not be interpreted as *range estimation*. Actually, like you say, your

radar might not realized that it is even being jammed.

It can actually believe the target IS at that range. It need not be ECCM.

A russian pilot suggested to me it could be interpreted as intermittently

recieving GCI dlink signals for the target.

 

ED picked one ECM/ECCM model for 1.12 (who knows about 1.13 ;)).

I picked another than 1.12 variant. You chose yourself.

They are both EXTREME simplified from rl. I consider mine to be more accurate.

Once again it is not a matter of being "realistic", it is a matter of being "most

realistic". A noise jammer will be seen on radar. Cause, it is noise. It will be seen, but

who knows HOW it will be seen...

Those mig21s did not use noise jammers, lockon does. Many more planes than Indian Mig21s

have ECM that can make you "invisible" (within limits) rather than noisy.

Edited July 1, 2009 by =RvE=Yoda

[Kuky]

well, I am eagerly waiting for the 1.13

[GGTharos]

I'm not gonna go into what my real pilot thinks, I just said that he thinks radar scripts are not realistic. he said the F-15 IFF is good but that's it. Sorry to say but this is what he said. It could well be he might be bit biased because parts of LRM (experimental) features are for russian aircraft and he does not fly them so not gonna say these are wrong.

 

The STT delay is mostly a slotback issue - a real one at that. As for the rest? I got a real F-15C pilot and crew chief saying 'can't confirm or deny but the more automation the better'. So ... ;)

 

 

Makes me wonder how realstic your judgement is in guessing how the real ECM/ECCm works. I assume that if you are right and aircraft that have ECm on could still have their range judged by the radar processing, then why wound't real pilots, like in example of these MiG-21's, be able to judge their enemy distance?

How good is yours guess? The 'can't detect them due to Israeli jammers' probably had some amount of truth to it, except for a slight problem: ECM wasn't used in those exercises, and jammers require partiuclar knowledge of a platform to function really, REALLY well.

 

Do you think Israel would hand out a jammer that would blind it's OWN aircraft? I don't.

Noise jamming can be ranged with a TMA process.

 

I remember you saying that the change of angle of the bugged contact, while jamming, could be estimated with trigonometry and rate if this angle change. I said that the rate of change at any greated range beyond WVR is so small there is no way to do this.

Yes there is. The F-15C, MiG-29 and Su-27 use this technique.

 

So in short, there is you who thinks and staes that this estimation is possible and real. My logic says it's not... and there you have discrepancy in opinions which brings out the argument wether LRM is right in this regard or not.

Your logic vs. radar manuals.

 

Now if in case for example, my opinion wuold be right, it brings out straight away question on how many, if any, other things you assumed are correct, are not. You see my point?

You're arguing about knowledge which you do not posess. I can tell you right now that jammer ranging is very real, at least under certain circumstances. No one's attempting to simulate super-smart deception jammers here.

 

Yoda's guesses have been very reasonable and compiled based on knowledge from many sources, including in fact speaking with real aircraft operators as well. There's no way he can represent a truly realistic jammer environment for you, but he's representing already something more dynamic, more interesting, and arguably containing a bit more realism than what the game comes with.

[A.S]

If you want to copy, rebuild, SIMULATE something - in this case aircombat, flightdynamics and avionics - you must start from the source, which you are trying to simulate of course.

 

And not only focused on the functional and technical parts, once put together too often resulting or resulted in anything else but realword-simulation.

 

The integrations of such "features" - if you wanna call it that way - do, or must have reasonable foundations, but it is most important also to see the repercussions in "gameplay".

 

Given "features" in gameplay will be ALWAYS used in "best working" manner (we all know what i mean here), but question must be:

 

Does this given environment (sim) educate or guide to real-world tactics and whose pleasure to expirience them IN RIGHT way ?

Where does it succeed in doing this...and where does it fail..and why?

 

But to understand this, first you have to appreciate and study the doctrine, THE PRINCIPLES (may it be BFM, ACM, BVR etc etc) of aerial combat.

.. analysing this...trying to work out the question: How can i "force" this realistic scenario with all its variables and conversions in "gameplay"?

There is no way around this, if you want to make things more realistic !

 

Simply said, yoda works on something, he tries to improve things....and he is cabable of...that alone is GOOD.

But question is, and that is what i guess most fear if they say: "we want LO how it is...dont change it". How will all those "changes" - if more realistic or not - change gameplay ??

 

Observed, or even better, explained from that perspective Yoda...ppl MIGHT understand you better. :smilewink:

Edited July 1, 2009 by A.S

[Kuky]

That's all fair enough GG and AS, but you will never ever be able to simulate real world environment to that extent to force everyone to use real world tactics and I think this is so not just because if limitations of real world systems which can be replicated pretty good, but there is huge lack of other things like, how is the pilot in real world trained to fly... is he going to fly to just shoot planes down when he get's an oportunity, or is he going to have assignment to attack or defent something. There is real world limitation of expense of all weapons, fuel, maintenance etc that never ever get any effect on gameplay.

 

I think the only way to force people to use real tactics is to first of all somehow train then on how they should fly and what consequences it will have if they dont. In real world if you do something stupid because you want to experiment you get punished by either dying, or maybe loosing your wings... many different things that can happen. You get regular crashes without any combat... you get lot of paperwork... you are responsible for everything you do... I think things like that make you fly a certain way not just what your aircraft systems are capable of.

 

I also see it in this way... many people know of 'exploits" of the game and know the weaknesses in coding of missiles and some have addapted to them very well. Hey even Yoda himself told me once he was the one using them before. Now all this scipting I feel makes the game somewhat unbalanced as one side even if some things are more realistic, most are cought up by surprise when they fly online how what they are used to do, no longer works... and on the other you have people (not many though) who know how to use the new way of how the game will work.. actually game code + LRM script.

 

There is a saying "Better the devil you know" and this is what maybe most of would preffer. If at least for example ED finally makes 1.13 and there is documentation on the changes and improvements, we all have nothing to complain... this way it's just that some trust and some don't what they see is changing.

 

To be honest I don't know what side to stand on

[A.S]

Hear ya.... but read my post again and let it drip . .. .. ...

[GGTharos]

Sure Kuky, but does that mean people should stop trying to press the issue? I mean you leave me no other way to respond to this other than 'well okay then, why don't you just go play Ace Combat/HAWX/Over-G fighters'?

 

I certainly agree with the sentiment that people are not and probably will never be inclined to fly tactically on a large scale.

 

As for people 'being caught by surprise', who cares? The existance of LRM is well publicized AND they can simply learn. It's not like it's available to only a select few. Should be stop blocking people from using TIR because some can't afford it?

 

Is it that people would get pissed off if they can't use what they bought? Maybe LRM would be better accepted if it cost money? ;)

 

For you final question, considering all you've written:

 

Yoda has provided PLENTY of documentation and details, nevermind that you can look at the code - he doesn't require you to do this, he's written out how it works so everyone can understand it.

Server admins can choose which parts they wish to implement.

Certain people are far too sensitive to getting shot down resulting in a tendency to blame everything but their own lack of skill plenty of times.

In addition, that 'there won't be anything to complain about' is not true and you know it. Certain people make it a sport of not just whining about what they 'don't have' in LOMAC, but they downright malign the developers. You KNOW there'll be whining no matter what happens.

LRM represents progress. If you fear change and progress, I guess 'the devil you know' works. Personally I'd rather see progress and people fearing my missiles. ;)

 

And again to summarize, people have maligned hours upon HOURS of Yoda's work which he provided for everyone's enjoyment - for free, and with the ability to choose your own options within - just because they got shot down and suffered a sudden notion of inferiority explicable only by the god-like powers granted by LRM. Please do not drown in the lake of sarcasm here.

And I'm not really necessarily directing this at you either Kuky, it's a general response to what you bring up - so my apologies if it sounds harsh, you're always a polite guy, so, no offense meant here or anything.

 

That's all fair enough GG and AS, but you will never ever be able to simulate real world environment to that extent to force everyone to use real world tactics and I think this is so not just because if limitations of real world systems which can be replicated pretty good, but there is huge lack of other things like, how is the pilot in real world trained to fly... is he going to fly to just shoot planes down when he get's an oportunity, or is he going to have assignment to attack or defent something. There is real world limitation of expense of all weapons, fuel, maintenance etc that never ever get any effect on gameplay.

 

I think the only way to force people to use real tactics is to first of all somehow train then on how they should fly and what consequences it will have if they dont. In real world if you do something stupid because you want to experiment you get punished by either dying, or maybe loosing your wings... many different things that can happen. You get regular crashes without any combat... you get lot of paperwork... you are responsible for everything you do... I think things like that make you fly a certain way not just what your aircraft systems are capable of.

 

I also see it in this way... many people know of 'exploits" of the game and know the weaknesses in coding of missiles and some have addapted to them very well. Hey even Yoda himself told me once he was the one using them before. Now all this scipting I feel makes the game somewhat unbalanced as one side even if some things are more realistic, most are cought up by surprise when they fly online how what they are used to do, no longer works... and on the other you have people (not many though) who know how to use the new way of how the game will work.. actually game code + LRM script.

 

There is a saying "Better the devil you know" and this is what maybe most of would preffer. If at least for example ED finally makes 1.13 and there is documentation on the changes and improvements, we all have nothing to complain... this way it's just that some trust and some don't what they see is changing.

 

To be honest I don't know what side to stand on

[topol-m]

Well i`d like to say how great it is that people like Yoda continue to modify this game so many years after release. I admire your work and hope we can see more of you in the upcoming DCS series too :)

[john_X]

as kuky said the new radar isnt realistic...

NOT the whole LRM mod....

 

and if the radar cant be verified, why to change it? and if you find a real pilot, tell him to play a week or 2, to discover all the issues it has, not a short flight and, been convinced by the good graphics of the game, to aprove a bad working radar...thats all...

 

you can also start a poll asking players what do they think about your radars realism...not about th whole lrm because overall is good..

 

@topol, it is one thing to be happy because people still create mods for this beautiful game, and other thing to believe its realistic too...i know you post here to encourage yoda to create more mods and i agree with you.but create good ones, closer to the reality is one thing , and create some arcade type ones is other thing..

Edited July 1, 2009 by john_X

[RvEYoda]

I just don't know what part of the F-15 radar everyone thinks is so unrealistic.

 

We know it keeps elevation and azimuth on your designated target.

1.12 does not do this, but LRM does.

 

We know it will use as much automation and ECCM as possible, automatically.

1.12 does not do this, LRM does.

 

We know it has automatic target step/assign capability

1.12 does not do this, LRM does.

 

Similarly I was just informed by someone speaking to Ru pilots about how their variant

of the same system works (which will likely be implemented later on).

 

Now I don't know about any other things I have done to the eagle radar

that i claim to be included from the real radar. Why is this so unrealistic?

Edited July 1, 2009 by =RvE=Yoda

[Pilotasso]

John X your post left me a bit confused, you seem to indicate tha MODing the game is a good thing, and that you do not know exactly how realistic LRM is, however at the same time you apear to go for Kuky's side view of things because it hapens that LRM is making your radar handling more difficult somehow.

 

LRM has its limitations but at least it apears to be based on something that exists and was not modeled ingame.

 

As long as it universaly distributed equaly among all players I think having LRM is btetter than having the game in its original condition. Thinking the game is better UnMODed, that it was the developers intention to be like that is a missconception. Its simply the way it was possible to realease. Lots of things are broken or left incomplete.

 

 

If anyone is unconfortable with LRM better use other arguments other than discussing how realistic LRM is without basing himself on something.

Edited July 1, 2009 by Pilotasso

[john_X]

yes you can mod the game, but mod unimportant stuff, like you are not aliowed to take off from the taxi ways... very good, its closer to the reality.

but dont mod the radar, because you risk to fail and to make it unrealistic..

 

pilotasso, are you angry with me because i said its a bad radar? thats why we have this forumz to complain here...

presing told me yesterday to play, not complain on the server...

ok , im complaining here then... DO YOU ALLOW ME? because if not....ill stop.

 

and i dont need any arguments pilotasso. i say, it doesnt seem to be realistic for me, of what ive seen...i say that leaving the game in its original condition, makes all the doubts dissapear..

now it comes yodas part, bringing arguments that changed stuuf is good.... to convince me...

 

is it a bad thing , pilotasso , to have this kind of conversation on the forumz?

Edited July 1, 2009 by john_X

[RvEYoda]

yes you can mod the game, but mod unimportant stuff, like you are not aliowed to take off from the taxi ways... very good, its closer to the reality.

but dont mod the radar, because you risk to fail and to make it unrealistic..

 

pilotasso, are you angry with me because i said its a bad radar? thats why we have this forumz to complain here...

presing told me yesterday to play not complain on the server...

ok , im complaining here then... DO YOU ALLOW ME? because if not....ill stop.

 

Ok John, then please clarify, I'd just like to know.

I ask the same question to you as everyone else.

What exactly do you think is wrong with it?

And please base it on real knowledge.

[Pilotasso]

John Im not angry with you at all. Im just debating its different.

[PoleCat]

Is all this discussion over one of the "experimental features" of LRM? What about all the wonderful things this MOD does for the sim? I don't understand why there would be a debate over features that are not officially part of LRM. Leave them off. They are off by default. We were warned not to use them.

 

Since you can turn off any feature you do not want to run in LRM you have lots of choices. I find that just about all of the features in LRM improve the game experience, minimize the use of exploits, and make the the sim feel more realistic.

 

If you enable F-15 IFF , add target step, ECCM, reduced chaff, refuel parking area only, take off runway only, airfield ownership. All are more realistic IMHO. Well worth the time it takes to get used to flying with LRM features enabled.

 

Experimental features be damned, this is a great MOD and a great gift to the LockOn community in so many ways. I think most people love this MOD, at least those that I have spoken to about it do. Sure there are some who would rather not enable all of the features but that is the beauty of LRM, you don't have to.

 

Out

[71st_Mastiff]

I my self love this mod, all though I'm new to the Game and haven't been biased against it..

[104th_Crunch]

Sure Kuky, but does that mean people should stop trying to press the issue? I mean you leave me no other way to respond to this other than 'well okay then, why don't you just go play Ace Combat/HAWX/Over-G fighters'?

 

I certainly agree with the sentiment that people are not and probably will never be inclined to fly tactically on a large scale.

 

As for people 'being caught by surprise', who cares? The existence of LRM is well publicized AND they can simply learn. It's not like it's available to only a select few. Should be stop blocking people from using TIR because some can't afford it?

 

Is it that people would get pissed off if they can't use what they bought? Maybe LRM would be better accepted if it cost money? ;)

 

For you final question, considering all you've written:

 

Yoda has provided PLENTY of documentation and details, nevermind that you can look at the code - he doesn't require you to do this, he's written out how it works so everyone can understand it.

Server admins can choose which parts they wish to implement.

Certain people are far too sensitive to getting shot down resulting in a tendency to blame everything but their own lack of skill plenty of times.

In addition, that 'there won't be anything to complain about' is not true and you know it. Certain people make it a sport of not just whining about what they 'don't have' in LOMAC, but they downright malign the developers. You KNOW there'll be whining no matter what happens.

LRM represents progress. If you fear change and progress, I guess 'the devil you know' works. Personally I'd rather see progress and people fearing my missiles. ;)

 

And again to summarize, people have maligned hours upon HOURS of Yoda's work which he provided for everyone's enjoyment - for free, and with the ability to choose your own options within - just because they got shot down and suffered a sudden notion of inferiority explicable only by the god-like powers granted by LRM. Please do not drown in the lake of sarcasm here.

And I'm not really necessarily directing this at you either Kuky, it's a general response to what you bring up - so my apologies if it sounds harsh, you're always a polite guy, so, no offense meant here or anything.

 

GG, very well written. I could not agree more.

 

@ Johnx, debate is a good thing. Explain what you like and don't like and why, but don't come in here blaming LRM for you losing lock. If you need a lesson as to how Lock On radar works then ask it somewhere else. Don't blame everything on LRM. DON'T go on a LRM server complaning about LRM when you are not even sure what is going on. Again, debate is good, complaining is ANNOYING. Know what you are talking about before you debate, and debate don't complain please. Thanks

Edited July 1, 2009 by Crunch

[BrumTx]

All I can say is this ;

 

Any mod, whatever it's for is a compliment to the game. People have spent hours, day's and weeks away from their family to make these mods for our family of gamers, be thankfull for whats around and after all is said, it's YOUR choice to play or not to play