Did it go unnoticed still? FC 2.0 upgrade will make LockOn and BS MP compatible!

[joey45]

If it had a new flyable [lets say the Jag gr3a] the yes...

[Rikus]

There is so much stuff different in FC2.0 it could well be standalone :)

 

Yo mean a new DVD, FC 2.0?

 

That will be great!!

 

By the way, in the FAQ says:

 

"Improved flight performance for player-controlled aircraft"

 

Improved like the Su25T AFM model?

 

Greetings

[Pilotasso]

I just meant "it could" not that it "will be" ;)

[graywo1fg]

WOW i'm in complete shock! this is incredible news!!! FLAMING CLIFFS REVIVED!!! and compatible with black shark!!!! amazing!!! i can NOT wait!!! Thank you ED :D

[Panzertard]

Remember, when the Black Shark becomes part of a combat arena like this - it's not going to be "fair".

Your Blackshark can still be killed without notification when a radar-missile homes on to you - and thats why you'll need your friendly cap overhead to conduct operations.

 

And thats where you'll see quite a few new possibilities when flying with a squadron :)

 

I'm soo looking forward to be able to "merge" operations with the LOCKON community. :D

[Outlaw24]

Great news, helicopters and jets, it just keep on getting better!

[Nate--IRL--]

"Limited 6 DOF cockpits that move up, down and sideways according to maneuvering"

 

So this is not TrackIR/Freetrack 6dof then?

 

Nate

[S77th-konkussion]

So. If I have a fully patched BS, and a 1.12. When I install this patch I will have:

 

1.12 LOMAC

 

2.0 LOMAC (assuming I exercise the option to have a parallell install)

 

and a 1.01c BS?

 

 

 

or does BS and 2.0 merge together?

 

 

EDIT re posting this in a better viewed thread

Edited November 18, 2009 by S77th-konkussion

[Speed_2]

While it will be fun to have a more fully modelled battlefield simulated with multiple platforms being player-controllable, if there's ever a DCS add-on that gives us a realistically modelled aircraft with ATA capability, it might be a little unfair to pit those pilots directly against lock-on pilots with simplified aircraft. Also, if the radar and missiles are not accurately modelled in Lock On, it will only give the Lock On fighter jocks an easier time killing a Hog or Black Shark. I guess that would be a bridge easily crossed by mission design or user preference, and the severity of the miss-match is not something I can directly speak on, never having flown any version of Lock On myself. To those of you who have, are these fears unfounded or not? I suppose that future Lock On patches could include any upgrades to the realism of missiles and radar, if needed, where the difference would count the most. Definately great news for the Lock On folks, no matter what!

[GGTharos]

While it will be fun to have a more fully modelled battlefield simulated with multiple platforms being player-controllable, if there's ever a DCS add-on that gives us a realistically modelled aircraft with ATA capability, it might be a little unfair to pit those pilots directly against lock-on pilots with simplified aircraft.

 

Yes and no. In the end the engagement cycle is designate, launch, crank. That you need to push a few more buttons BEFORE the engagement to set up is probably not a big deal. I can run radar modes etc in falcon as fast as I do in LO, and the missiles come off the rails about as fast as well, so ...

 

Also, if the radar and missiles are not accurately modelled in Lock On, it will only give the Lock On fighter jocks an easier time killing a Hog or Black Shark.

 

That is a silly notion ... because OF COURSE fighter pilots would be overwhelming vs. non-fighters. No matter what the mudsluggers here jump in to tell you, thinking otherwise will lead to your doom. Can you fight a fighter? You can.

I have, I have 3 flanker kills and a mig kill flying the A-10 - but that's because I knew how to do A2A a whole lot better than they did. If their skill was equal I'd had been toast.

A Ka-50 pilot should think of hiding. Engaging fighters will be a 1 in a million opportunity literally, not figuratively. That is a one in a million change to get to start an engagement vs. a fighter.

 

I guess that would be a bridge easily crossed by mission design or user preference, and the severity of the miss-match is not something I can directly speak on, never having flown any version of Lock On myself. To those of you who have, are these fears unfounded or not? I suppose that future Lock On patches could include any upgrades to the realism of missiles and radar, if needed, where the difference would count the most. Definately great news for the Lock On folks, no matter what!

 

Finally, yeah, these fears are pretty unfounded since you're looking so far into the future it's just nuts. Far too far.

[TheMoose]

Let's see ... I like my bases stationed a minimum of 150nm from the front, so you're unlikely to catch me landed ... no amount of luck is going to help you :D

 

Careful with these words. If I make it close to your base. I might just park it and wait until I see fighters retreating to home base, then when you’re on final, I might just sneak up and snipe your behind lol. Making it there, well that’s another story. Again depending if all ground to air has been disable... Coordinating with Air to air will be the key for this type of successful strike.

Anyhow, looks like lots of fun :D

[GGTharos]

Careful with these words. If I make it close to your base.

 

... someone will be getting fired for not setting up good SHORAD ;D

 

I might just park it and wait until I see fighters retreating to home base, then when you’re on final, I might just sneak up and snipe your behind lol. Making it there, well that’s another story. Again depending if all ground to air has been disable... Coordinating with Air to air will be the key for this type of successful strike.

Anyhow, looks like lots of fun :D

Have you tried flying 300nm in the shark yet? ;)

Think about it ... you're looking at a one hour flight - in the meantime you'll be subjected to basically 10 fighter sorties.

[TheMoose]

 

... someone will be getting fired for not setting up good SHORAD ;D

 

Have you tried flying 300nm in the shark yet? ;)

Think about it ... you're looking at a one hour flight - in the meantime you'll be subjected to basically 10 fighter sorties.

 

LOL looks like the mission editor(human) would need to comply with our wishes :smilewink: If all fails, heck I’ll jump into a Mig. That`s what I like of having the variety. This is truly a good thing of integrating LO to DCS imo. At least we would not have to wait 10 years down the road for this type of combat even if the KA50 will be more challenging then the other birds. In the end is all about having fun :D will comply with the addons when they come :thumbup:

 

Cheers

Edited November 18, 2009 by TheMoose

[Speed_2]

 

That is a silly notion ... because OF COURSE fighter pilots would be overwhelming vs. non-fighters. No matter what the mudsluggers here jump in to tell you, thinking otherwise will lead to your doom. Can you fight a fighter? You can.

I have, I have 3 flanker kills and a mig kill flying the A-10 - but that's because I knew how to do A2A a whole lot better than they did. If their skill was equal I'd had been toast.

A Ka-50 pilot should think of hiding. Engaging fighters will be a 1 in a million opportunity literally, not figuratively. That is a one in a million change to get to start an engagement vs. a fighter.

 

Duh.

The only thing that's "silly" is that you think I'm talking about an A-10 or Black Shark engaging and killing a fighter. Don't you understand the importance of a realistically modelled radar in allowing an A-10 and ESPECIALLY a Black Shark to hide from enemy radar using terrain masking and ground clutter? If we don't have this realistically modelled, and the radar is too much of a gods-eye in the sky, then us Black Shark pilots are in trouble trying to hide.

Edited November 18, 2009 by Speed_2

[GGTharos]

A helicopter cannot hide from modern PD radar. As long as your rotors are running, you may as well be landed.

 

As for an A-10, it can hide in clutter by notching just fine in LO. You said yourself you don't play LO .. so I'll tell you right now, there's pretty much no difference between radar in LO and radar in say, Falcon, aside from certain particulars which aren't really going to make a difference anyway (potentially RCS, which would cause targets to appear at different ranges, for example, or different radar modes. None of these really affect an A-10's ability to hide from the radar, it's the exact same technique executed in the same manner).

 

One other difference could be ECM/ECCM, but this gets extremely iffy since, for example, a A-10's jammer isn't likely to do anything until you go STT on it ... and since you have TWS, why would you? (Yes, there are reasons for it ... we won't get into it here).

 

Besides, as far as modern missiles go, increasing realism would make them deadlier (and older missiles less so) ... so you're rather overreacting.

 

Duh.

The only thing that's "silly" is that you think I'm talking about an A-10 or Black Shark engaging and killing a fighter. Don't you understand the importance of a realistically modelled radar in allowing an A-10 and ESPECIALLY a Black Shark to hide from enemy radar using terrain masking and ground clutter? If we don't have this realistically modelled, and the radar is too much of a gods-eye in the sky, then us Black Shark pilots are in trouble trying to hide.

[Speed_2]

Thanks, that makes me feel a bit better then :)

[Inseckt]

So, if I have understood this correctly, you need to have LO:MAC AND LO:FC 1.2 To be able to patch to LO:FC 2.0? It is not a direct patch from LO:MAC, right? Just to clarify...

 

Great news by the way... Might be the "boost" LO needed to stay alive until DCS have fast jets...

Edited November 18, 2009 by Inseckt

[Made.In.China.00]

Wow! I totally didn't see that coming, I thought LOCK ON is "dead", that's why I skipped it and went straight for DCS:BS. Now with the winter break coming up, I'll have to seriously think about it.

Some questions:

To have FC 2.0, I'll need to buy LO:MAC and FC then the FC2.0 upgrade? If so, my I suggest a bundle of some sort? And will FC (not 2.0) still install that driver which seem to have caused quite some problem?

What are the big difference between FC2.0 then? Besides real (what does this real mean anyway?) 6DOF, clickable copit?

[EtherealN]

And will FC (not 2.0) still install that driver which seem to have caused quite some problem?

 

No.

 

Quoting the FAQ:

Q: What copy protection will be used?

A: StarForce online activation (only) will be used. Based on the success of DCS: Black Shark protection, we feel this provides the best compromise of user-friendliness and protection of property. Unlike the reported hardware problems reported with an earlier version of StarForce applied to the original Flaming Cliffs, no such issues have been reported with the current online activation method that does not install any drivers to the user’s computer.

[26-J39]

Well now, not only an upgrade for Lock On. This means that I'll finally get to try shooting GG down in his silly fast-jet pants with my black shark.

 

Wish me luck... :P

 

GOOOOOOD LUUUUUCK! :D You'll need it.. :P Need a wingman? :)

 

Seriously tho this is excellent news!!! I didn't think it would happen.. But wait 1 sec... BS with be compatible with the A-10C module and BS soon to be compatible with FC which has an A-10.. Hmm getting a little confused how this will all piece together.. Anyone?

[ZaltysZ]

Russian alcohol free Vodka.......:megalol::megalol::lol::lol: good one man that's just hilarious, REP INBOUND Namenlos Ein

 

Voda and vodka differ only in suffix "k", which is diminutive suffix in Russian. So, if voda means water, then vodka can mean little/lesser water. Or it can mean distilled liquor. Tricky ? :doh: :D

[SUBS17]

ED :worthy:

[EagleEye]

Great news indeed. Both communitys can play together then.:thumbup:

Looking forward to nice Coop`s with the fixed wings.

I will not joining server`s with PvP sessions, though...:helpsmilie:

[Quirkitized]

This is great news, maybe I can get my spare PC back up and running and host some coop missions when this comes out :)

 

Thanks ED!

[159th_Viper]

I will not joining server`s with PvP sessions, though...:helpsmilie:

 

Why Not?

 

Fear of being Tanked again and again in the Kamov? If so - understandable, but I'm willing to give the Mission-Designers, having regard to the new Dynamic that Rotary will introduce, the benefit of the Doubt that they will be able to cater for the added Dynamic and Author their Missions accordingly.

 

3Sqn have in the past for LockOn tailored Missions to aid Bombers in a Hostile environment with Inter Alia Fighter Flight Distances/SAM Umrellas/Intelligent Defence Networks etc etc - No reason why the same cannot be true for Rotaries........That said - I'm with you. If the Mission does not Step Up, I will not be Flying it.....Was never one to voluntarily aid in the Ego-Stroking of a Fast-jet Jockey by being a Target Drone......:P

 

Think about it - Properly Structured with Good Voice Comms, PvP is about as real as it gets and a helluva lot of Fun to Boot :)

 

 

Ps: Willing to Bet a Fiver........