LRM 2.0 Released!

[A.S]

If i speak about implementations of more realism in simulated environment, i speak about things like:

 

• accurate physics - may it be aircrafts, weapons, gravity, world etc etc, which correlate with eachother in right way - resulting or leading to somewhat more realistic geometrical or tactical solutions ...
  
• more accurate radarcharacteristics, from how they work down to various variables influencing their performance, though still simplified but still logic in overall picture and outcome
  
• reasonable countermeasure logic and parameters and their proper influence regarding various scenarios
  
• and the list goes on.....
  

As you can see, it requires alot of accurate datasources, inteligent integration of all this variables and parameters, in such a way, that they make sense in corporate operation and not only put into place in good proposition.

 

 

 

 

 

Im sure ED tried to make the best possible at time, but how the game really is played ("klick this then this happens, do this trick cuz it works, if you do this, that happens") made it very quick hollow, where all the lacks are.

• Do i fly realistic aircombat? What does realistic aircombat look like and why? Did i ever read anything about it, so i can make a picture?
  
• Or have i just figured out how to play this game smart, because i figured out how things work?
  
• What do i really want?
  

So, if people want more realism, they must get rid of old establishments and habbits.

It´s not granted at all, that just because it is an original game, that it is more realsitic, not AT ALL!

 

If GG says to Kuky "you could play Hawk or Over-G" it makes me smile, because, to be honest, it is not any better or worse classification considering the very simplified and unaccurate assembly.

 

But point is this:

People are working to make things better. There might be fails, but that´s part of progression.

GG has tremendous knowledge and interest if it comes to accurate sources and researches and his input is to be taken thankfully, even he might be not always right, but im sure he is not just saying "his opinion" without researchig on a topic first.

Yoda has very analytic talents to approach things and so he does....

 

So, let them....let them work....of course it´s ok to aks why they do things what they do...but its ppl like them pushing things forward.

 

Posts like "I don´t think...I don´t feel that is right" without reasonable argumentations or facts and just based on feelings are useless.

Halfhearted expressions of "fear" either.

 

If you want to argue the topic....make it CONSTRUCTIVE !

 

me out...

Edited July 2, 2009 by A.S

[john_X]

first one, @crunch:

 

i said that is ONLY ONE thing very wrong at lrm. the radar changes.i said overall its good, but you didnt read. its easy for you to say im blaming lrm mod, but i prefere another term, like help... helping developers in making it more realistic. if you consider that im complaining and its very annoying for you, dont read this.or even when playing on server.. dont read it.

i wont stop saying whats wrong with any other mod.

 

second, @ A.S.

what do you understand by making it constructive? to shut up?

 

as i said, i dont like this radar changes (dont seem to be like in real life) but i cant present you any other alternative because im not a pilot. all i can say is leave the radar as it was before because i believe more EDs version of radar(i supose they talked with real specialists)...

Edited July 1, 2009 by john_X

[A.S]

 

second, @ A.S.

what do you understand by making it constructive? to shut up?

 

 

no

 

solution X is good or bad because ...(details, analytics) .... and its impact in current "gameplay" or/and comparsion to real condidtions

solution Y is good or bad bacause ...(details, analytics) .... and its impact in current "gameplay" or/and comparsion to real condidtions

 

logic?

Edited July 1, 2009 by A.S

[GGTharos]

first one, @crunch:

 

i said that is ONLY ONE thing very wrong at lrm. the radar changes.i said overall its good, but you didnt read. its easy for you to say im blaming lrm mod, but i prefere another term, like help... helping developers in making it more realistic. if you consider that im complaining and its very annoying for you, dont read this.or even when playing on server.. dont read it.

i wont stop saying whats wrong with any other mod.

 

 

All you said was 'my radar wouldn't lock him even though I had visual'. This isn't even good enough for a bug report - do you get this or no? The changes to the radar are BENEFICIAL to you, so long as you actually read Yoda's documentation and understand both what the LOMAC radar does, and what LRM adds to it.

 

You have demonstrated that you have no such knowledge, you've been unable to provide useful information beyond showing that you're bitter at being shot down.

 

Do you have something useful to provide if you think you've found a bug?

 

as i said, i dont like this radar changes (dont seem to be like in real life) but i cant present you any other alternative because im not a pilot. all i can say is leave the radar as it was before because i believe more EDs version of radar(i supose they talked with real specialists)...

 

How can you say 'don't seem to be like in real life' and follow it up with 'but I can't present any other alternative' ...

 

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, man?

 

Yes, ED did speak with specialists, they did read the manuals, and they do know that their implementation isn't particularly realistic.

While we can certainly hope some issues will be taken care of come the next Lock On project, ED doesn't have infinite time to work on all of this either, as they are trying to provide us the net generation of air simulation: DCS.

 

Because ED has little time, it is up to modders to help out and make things more realistic if possible, and that is exactly what Yoda is doing.

 

Yoda relies on aircraft manuals and pilot testimonials among other sources, and he is also limited by what LOFC provides as exports and inputs in making his enhancements.

 

Let me say this again: LRM does NOT MODIFY RADAR BEHAVIOR. The radar physics are still the same. If that aircraft was in your face and you didn't pick him up, you did something wrong. Not LRM. LRM does not prevent a lock in WVR.

[A.S]

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, man?

 

I needed a Sierra Echo Charlie here before i started to lol :lol:

[john_X]

ggtharos.i dont know why im trying to explain something you dont want to understand.you wont change anything anyway...

 

do you want to say you didnt change anything about the radar? what about that autolock?

 

do what you want, anyway with all what you read about radars and other stuff you aint nothin...you dont now anything more than anyone else...because you are not a pilot, just a game tester...what real pilot is a fool to share to you radars real performances?

 

im saying that, between this 2 radars we have here, EDs is more credible, and even that one cant be verified so, why change some things if you will never know the truth?

[GGTharos]

I'll say it again: LRM does not affect CAC auto-lock functions within LOFC.

 

You have not explained anything. You have only whined and complained, with no explanation whatsoever beyond some guy shooting you up because you couldn't lock him. This is because you don't actually know what you're trying to explain - in other words, you were shot down and decided to blame it on LRM.

 

ggtharos.i dont know why im trying to explain something you dont want to understand.you wont change anything anyway...

 

do you want to say you didnt change anything about the radar? what about that autolock?

 

do what you want, anyway with all what you read about radars and other stuff you aint nothin...you dont now anything more than anyone else...because you are not a pilot, just a game tester...what real pilot is a fool to share to you radars real performances?

 

im saying that, between this 2 radars we have here, EDs is more credible, and even that one cant be verified so, why change some things if you will never know the truth?

Edited July 1, 2009 by GGTharos

[Aeroscout]

Alright, I'm going to just post this once. I don't intend to feed the fire or anything but...

 

WTF guys! My god, you sound like a bunch of arguing High School Kids!

(and I know what that's like :smilewink:)

 

Look, I, like many others, highly respect the work that Yoda does for the community, and I understand his, and those who have worked with him, desire to defend the mod they have worked so hard on. I completely understand this. However, this doesn't make Kuky's and JohnX's opinions invalid. It could just be me, but the utter disrespect they appear (at least to me) to receive is completely unwarranted. Yes, they don't like LRM, does this mean they are not serious flight simulator enthusiasts and should be cast out of the lockon community to play Ace Combat? I don't think so.

*stops to catch his breath*

 

Alright, now to address LRM and my opinions surrounding it. I really hope I don't appear any less of a person then I already am in most people's eyes because of said opinions.

 

First, my understanding of LRM:

LRM is simply server based code that is used to prevent various exploits or "enhance" ""game play"" (note the double quotes, A.S)

As such, the actual hard coded game engine, which is what actually runs the simulated Flight Model, Radar, and other systems, cannot be modified.

Thus, workarounds are enabled. ie. A flashing HUD in the F-15 takes the place of an IFF X in the Target designator box, which was omitted from the official release of lockon and its subsequent patches.

 

Realism?: The above example of F-15 IFF and the new low-level turbulence are the only LRM features that truly replicates a Real life system or real life events. Because of the before mentioned Hard Code, addressing Radar, ECM, ECCM, Countermeasures, etc cannot be changed with the desired amount of realism, which in this type of community, is absolute. Thus, workarounds are done. Example: when a jammer is locked, the estimated range an Russian fighters jumps around undoubtedly using the Ctrl+ and Ctrl- keystrokes. However, this has undesired effects on the Russian birds, which then have their unlocked, RWS mode elevation step changed and must be manually changed. Many don't have this mapped to a HOTAS or joystick, just as I didn't until the completion of my sim-pit. Also, when the pilot knows the jammer is in range, he cannot fire because he doesn't have Launch Authorization. The pilot must then use the dreaded override, Alt-W keystroke (Which is considered taboo online) ad then people get pissed, yada yada. Other examples, such as the anti-barrel-roll feature are once again forced to work not for the missile, but against the defending aircraft, where its g limit is set to something like 3-4 g.

 

Opinions: LRM is, as far as I can see, one of, if not the largest undertaking of any modder the community has ever seen! Howerver, as with all mods in this limited sim, it has its draw backs. Unfortunately, these outweigh the benefits (once again, In my opinion)

The Anti-Barrel-Roll feature is just pure and simply wrong. The fact that you limit the defending aricraft's proformance right at the point here he needs every bit he can get is simply incorrect. This isn't realism, this is a handicap!

Also, with LRM, my radar locks, unlocks, you name it, with out my even telling it to do so. You can call it realism all you want, I wouldn't know, but it's just so different from the past 3 years I have dedicated to the sim. Suddenly you change the game, say it's the same game, give it to all the servers (namely the popular ones) and expect the whole community to welcome it with open arms is quite frankly ridiculous!

Turbulence: Great idea, poorly done. I have had my fair share of small aircraft flights. All I can say is that turbulence feels nothing like what LRM portrays. Realism? No. Virtual pilots trying to cover their @$$ from exploiters? Yes.

 

Conclusion: Sometimes I really do wonder what was so bad about the "old" lockon, which is why all of us are here, because the "old lockon" was good enough (and pretty damn good too!)

Because LRM changes the very way we have played lockon for many years, there is going to be opposition. In my opinion, We have gone from a somewhat realistic sim to a slightly different sim at the same level or realism with a very "foreign" and buggy online play environment. I don't want to have to feel like I'm testing a piece of beta software every time I play online. In short, we're not going to see the changes we want until 1.13. I think that's they way it's going to stay.

 

I could go on, but I've practically written a book, so I'll leave it here. However, remember I share these thoughts with the utmost respect for Yoda, GG, AS and all those others who have brought wonderful ideas and mods to the lockon community.

[GGTharos]

For not intending to feed the fire ...

 

Realism?: The above example of F-15 IFF and the new low-level turbulence are the only LRM features that truly replicates a Real life system or real life events.

 

Wrong. Low level turbulence is there to discourage low-altitude offensive A2A.

 

The IFF is a 'this is how we were able to do it' feature, while the real F-15 has IFF, it works differently.

 

 

Other examples, such as the anti-barrel-roll feature are once again forced to work not for the missile, but against the defending aircraft, where its g limit is set to something like 3-4 g.

The Anti-Barrel-Roll feature is just pure and simply wrong. The fact that you limit the defending aricraft's proformance right at the point here he needs every bit he can get is simply incorrect. This isn't realism, this is a handicap!

The anti-barrel roll exploit code is meant to force you to defend IN THE BEAM. It will limit you if you decide to take on an active head-on, and you deserve having nothing to dodge it with for making the attempt. Real pilots would go TO THE BEAM and perform an orthogonal roll, not some silly head-on barrel roll.

While the method of limitation is unrealistic, the result is: To force you to fight the missile like you ought ... by putting it on your 3-9. None of the ludicrous barrel-rolling-straight-at-your-target nonsense.

 

Conclusion: Sometimes I really do wonder what was so bad about the "old" lockon, which is why all of us are here, because the "old lockon" was good enough (and pretty damn good too!)

Since you're wondering, I'll give you an answer: 'Old Lockon' encourages a very unrealistic style of A2A. LRM forces people just a little bit back in the right direction.

 

We have gone from a somewhat realistic sim to a slightly different sim at the same level or realism with a very "foreign" and buggy online play environment. I don't want to have to feel like I'm testing a piece of beta software every time I play online. In short, we're not going to see the changes we want until 1.13. I think that's they way it's going to stay.

Your opinion is incorrect; and I'm fairly certain that LRM will have its place even with 1.13.

 

Should you want to actually discuss what is changed and why, feel free to ask and edumacation will be provided ;)

 

The funny thing is that all this wah-wah can be avoided with some rather simple adjustments to your flight profile (a more realistic flight profile, oh my).

Edited July 2, 2009 by GGTharos

[Kuky]

Would I be correct to say I feel it is lot of Yoda's fault to have so many people fly using exploits because he is the one making all the videos?

 

Also why should all of us now addopt to what Yoda and you GG feel is correct when it was Yoda himself that was (and most likely still is) flying using exploits and helpers?

 

He flies with very low resolution, he even has icons in his last screenshot, he has perfect SA (is this possible I really wonder and how does he do it?) and for crying out loud... let me repeat again... it was Yoda who said to me himself he was flying using all of the exploits and gotten so very good at it and he is the one postig all the exploit videos... that alone in my world with fact that he can't get shot down even when against multiple threats tells me he is not the guy I should trust... I find that utterly unrealstic and impossible. I trust in ED and what they code, and so I will wait for 1.13 and avoid any scripting Yoda or you mgiht thins is realistic.... and some of it clearly isn't any better then stock LockOn. It gives some benefits but also has some very bad drawbacks... so there I said it... I will not post here any more... you can now talk bad about me and how I don't know anything all you want.

[Kuky]

Oh and, neither you or Yoda are fighter pilots so you don't have first hand experience and even if you were, there is no way you wold know how radar and other aircraft systems work for "enemy" aircraft, and even if you would meaning you have some inside info like from spying etc.. you would not be allowed to share that with anyone.

[GGTharos]

Oh, there you go again :)

[A.S]

Good old drama in traditional fashion :pilotfly:

.... i just hope all will see and focus on the good parts of progressions and evolutional changes rather then "you know this, i know that better ...you just read from books, but my Mom is B52 bomber ..real reality is top secret, so we keep doing unlogic things....holy rEAl BeiloTs know things better my ###...etc etc etc.."

 

:smilewink:

 

ITS JUUST A GAAAAAME ! and a good one. Some do 3D-Models, some do Terrain mods, some try to do or improve other things, or how many out there realy approached aerial warfare from realisitc perpective trying to implement it in their gameplay in LockOn? ....gimme a break.

[Kuky]

I do AS, and so can everyone else.. without any need for scripts

[RedTiger]

Also, when the pilot knows the jammer is in range, he cannot fire because he doesn't have Launch Authorization. The pilot must then use the dreaded override, Alt-W keystroke (Which is considered taboo online) ad then people get pissed, yada yada.

 

Question about this ^^^. Anyone know if this is realistic? TBH, the whole way LOMAC models ECM and HOJ has always bothered me. I've always found the way you can lock on to the ECM noise and then magically auto-lock the bandit within a certain range to be hard to believe. Wouldn't you lose HOJ and then have to lock the actual aircraft or is the FC computer in these planes "smart" enough to do this for you? The way this works in LOMAC defeats much of the point of ECM. You can lock up HOJ, shoot, crank/F-pole/A-pole and just wait for your radar to pick them up, all the while your missile continues to guide towards them.

 

The only other sim I have experience with is Falcon, and there ECM can be a potent ability. You get little chevrons on the display that you cannot lock up. These are truly "noise" as you can see these even with the radar on standby. You can eventually "burn through" and lock on at a fairly close range, but again you -cannot- lock up the jamming noise and just lob missiles at it while you wait for a STT. Using ECM provides a clear understandable advantage against non-ecm equipped fighters due to this and also makes your ARH missiles and the enemies' far more deadly. The fact that you can be bugged and not realize you're detected creates this lovely suspense of turning on ECM and revealing yourself vs. not turning on and possibly remaining undetected vs. having that little <M> pop-up on the RWR and chirp away with a pitbull ARH missile seconds away from killing you.

 

Yoda, I like how LRM at least tries to address this by not letting you lock onto ECM at long range. I know you and/or A. S. have experience with Falcon. The fact that locking on to the ECM is still possible seems to suggest that you feel Falcon's version is wrong, or at least since we have the Eagle and Flanker, you want to be more optimistic about this capability.

[A.S]

Yes i know Kuky...i asked or aimed that question with back thoughts...

Many try it..... and does it work out? or does it end in "pfff maddogs...pff exploiters....pfff low flyer" ?

[Kuky]

For me it works most of the time, it really depends who you are flyng with and against. If I'm in server where I see lot of "exploting" and unrealistic flying and things where I go "WTF was that?" I get pissed off and leave :music_whistling:

[GGTharos]

Short answer: Depends on the type of ECM.

Long asnwer: PM :D

 

Question about this ^^^. Anyone know if this is realistic? TBH, the whole way LOMAC models ECM and HOJ has always bothered me. I've always found the way you can lock on to the ECM noise and then magically auto-lock the bandit within a certain range to be hard to believe. Wouldn't you lose HOJ and then have to lock the actual aircraft or is the FC computer in these planes "smart" enough to do this for you? The way this works in LOMAC defeats much of the point of ECM. You can lock up HOJ, shoot, crank/F-pole/A-pole and just wait for your radar to pick them up, all the while your missile continues to guide towards them.

[RvEYoda]

Would I be correct to say I feel it is lot of Yoda's fault to have so many people fly using exploits because he is the one making all the videos?

 

Also why should all of us now addopt to what Yoda and you GG feel is correct when it was Yoda himself that was (and most likely still is) flying using exploits and helpers?

 

He flies with very low resolution, he even has icons in his last screenshot, he has perfect SA (is this possible I really wonder and how does he do it?) and for crying out loud... let me repeat again... it was Yoda who said to me himself he was flying using all of the exploits and gotten so very good at it and he is the one postig all the exploit videos... that alone in my world with fact that he can't get shot down even when against multiple threats tells me he is not the guy I should trust... I find that utterly unrealstic and impossible. I trust in ED and what they code, and so I will wait for 1.13 and avoid any scripting Yoda or you mgiht thins is realistic.... and some of it clearly isn't any better then stock LockOn. It gives some benefits but also has some very bad drawbacks... so there I said it... I will not post here any more... you can now talk bad about me and how I don't know anything all you want.

 

Thank you for writing *I don't like your mod cause I think you are a cheater*.

Now it is my fault these problems exist, and that I tried to help out minimizing

them has no importance? Kuky, listen to what you are saying. Every single

post here has been with no other goals than to make me look bad, and it is

coming to the point of being ridiculous.

 

how is flying 1920x1200 being low resolution? I have an Eizo 24" monitor btw.

 

Some of my development is also done when I am away, on a laptop,

which I run windowed mode on to see the logs from LEAVU/EAU project.

 

Side note to Aeroscout:

Why keep this tone against some? Reason is they come in here, say the mod

is bad, often because they say their ET doesn't hit anymore. Tell you what,

the mod couldn't even, if it wanted to mod the ET, or any other missile for

that matter. Then they tell everyone how they should avoid the mod

because it is unrealistic. This is very annoying, saying your product sucks

for something it doesn't even do. And when we ask what the problem is,

we get an answer that there are new (again things not touched by the mod),

that are wrong, OR, that they simply don't like modding. Sometimes we are

simply attacked personally for no reason at all.

 

What all you guys tend to forget is....

 

LRM IS MODULAR

 

You are not meant to have all features on if you don't want to.

 

Simply turn them off!

 

Many features are SPECIFICALLY released not to implement a realistic system,

but to indirectly force a realistic approach to combat. If I want to use some systems,

and some not? That is up to the admin. For example 169th server chose some and

leave some off. They have this posted in their briefing and their forums.

 

Nobody is forcing you to fly with LRM.

 

Some of us however, do think that manuals+engineers+pilotsWord+other sims doing it,

is enough of proof for us to implement TWS elevation/azimuth follows target, among many

other things.

 

I find it poor taste to go saying things about the people behind a product being

cheaters that nobody is forcing you to use.

 

I'll tell you why I think some people don't like it.

 

It makes the game more advanced. But important is to understand it makes the actual systems simpler.

It makes combat more advanced because you actually have to read some text/book on tactics and a2a

combat. It reduces the random factor in some situations where an upper hand should clearly be had.

You mostly cannot use old Lockon 1v1 attack patterns.

 

Don't like it? Don't use it. But Don't come say it's crap for something you don't understand,

and when you get proven wrong don't call the creators cheaters just because you somehow

want to rescue your previous attack.

 

I have full respect for people saying "I just want to play normal lockon". Nobody is forcing you to do

anything else ;). I think of it as playing chess with the addition of a dice. The game is played normally,

but sometimes the dice is thrown and changes things. With LRM the amount of times you throw the dice,

and the situations it is allowed to be thrown are changed. This is what the mod aims to do. This is

what some won't like. It will, and is meant to, encourage them to change their flight tactics to better

represent what is for example in the famous book of Robert L Shaw.

Edited July 2, 2009 by =RvE=Yoda

[MoGas]

Thank you for writing *I don't like your mod

I'll tell you why I think some people don't like it.

 

It makes the game more advanced. But important is to understand it makes the actual systems simpler.

It makes combat more advanced because you actually have to read some text/book on tactics and a2a

combat. It reduces the random factor in some situations where an upper hand should clearly be had.

You mostly cannot use old Lockon 1v1 attack patterns.

 

Don't like it? Don't use it. But Don't come say it's crap for something you don't understand,

and when you get proven wrong don't call the creators cheaters just because you somehow

want to rescue your previous attack.

 

I have full respect for people saying "I just want to play normal lockon". Nobody is forcing you to do

anything else ;). I think of it as playing chess with the addition of a dice. The game is played normally,

but sometimes the dice is thrown and changes things. With LRM the amount of times you throw the dice,

and the situations it is allowed to be thrown are changed. This is what the mod aims to do. This is

what some won't like. It will, and is meant to, encourage them to change their flight tactics to better

represent what is for example in the famous book of Robert L Shaw.

 

Well said, I normaly stay out on some sort of issues, but some comments are getting too far. Calling someone as a stranger because "he kills me allways and he can't get shot down from my teammates" are a bit too far. And judgeing from screenshots jeezz....:noexpression:

 

It is like in real life Yoda and this forum is in real life :), that people always start too criticize first before the are thinking what is going on or what is the reason for it. Anyway LRM is a good MOD too bring some new wind and challenge in too Lockon, and I like it :thumbup:.

 

It is good that not all people are thinking like some in here, outerwise we would still drop stones :huh:.

 

cheers

[A.S]

I will never understand why people tolerate "Mirage-Fake-Shiny-Thing" Mods with flightcharacteristics and cockpits of something else, or even worse X-Wing prototypes, but protest so much against some serious logic and reasonable changes?

 

Are we soo customer-drilled meanwhile...is brainwork painfull?

Edited July 2, 2009 by A.S

[Boberro]

On beginning when I played LRM I felt weird... but after while I loved it! IMHO LO is arcadish in most (especially due of low, poor avionic modelling) ... this mod gives more realism than LO has "on start". But people also like game like it was on "start" beacouse they are customed to play it in simpler like style.

 

Personally for me most valuable part of LRM is (as I fly most of time Ru birds) ER blinker fix. Now rarer you lose valuable missile.

When I hear LRM did worse LO I am sad a bit... maybe for them it is time to play Hawx, isn't it? ;]

[BrumTx]

Can I respectfully ask that this name-calling BS ( and I don't mean Black Shark) stop. It is doing nothing but fill the forums pages.

Some people like Mod's other's don't, some people play online other's don't. It's a HUMAN thing called CHOICE.

If you don't like it dont play it or load it.

[Kuky]

ah forget about it... obviously some just don't get it

[159th_Viper]

I will never understand why people tolerate "Mirage-Fake-Shiny-Thing" Mods with flightcharacteristics and cockpits of something else, or even worse X-Wing prototypes, but protest so much against some serious logic and reasonable changes?.....

 

Fear of the Unknown!

 

It's a Basic Instinct.......you have a 'product' in working order, albeit good, bad or otherwise lacking.......Bottom-Line is it works: Mods which add to the product are for this discussion irrelevant - The Veracity of the 'Product' itself is at stake.......

 

So it begs the question thus: Why change?

 

It does the Job! Whether the said job at the end of the day gets done in a manner which is Good, bad or otherwise lacking.......Vitally important to remember that said reflection is Subjective and forms the basis of an Individual's Opinion re the 'Product' and attendant 'Methods of Change'.

 

Said opinions are unified in the desire to welcome change, but again, as the subjectivity of the opinions will dictate, the manner in achieving said change fuels the debate and sadly, the inevitable hostility which follows.......

 

One would sincerely hope that through constructive debate and discussion, our boundries of understanding the issues are broadened.......sadly however said debates often spiral into a 'Power Struggle' and the intention behind change is lost in a 'Battle' for 'Supremacy' couched in posts veiled in innuendo and the like.......and as a consequence, the perceived 'Attack' on the Subjective belief/opinion held alienates the holder of the belief even further.......and so the vicious cycle continues.

 

Is it a matter of 'The more you learn, the more you don't know......'? Who knows - one thing is however certain - and this quote summarizes it well:

 

"....and the striving is the important part and not the solving. For it is in the striving that we grow and learn and change. If we solve one problem, we usually find another waiting in the wings, even more than one, but Lo..when we strive to be cordial, to listen, to embrace another's opinion, we become so much more than we thought we could be...."

 

 

Purpose of this diatribe?

 

 

As above......an attempt to stomp out the bashing: Conduct unbecomin' the LockOn/DCS Community :cry: :D

 

 

:pilotfly: