Ayane Posted April 11, 2005 Posted April 11, 2005 What i like to see in 1.2 instead of the flyable Ka-52.... Non-Flyable AI Controlled Aircraft Yak-141 Freestyle A Russian VTOL/STOL Aircraft for Russian Aircraft Carriers.. Could be made for various missions.. Rafale New Generation 4 Aircraft by the reknown French company Dassault..Multirole fighter for the next generation.. Typhoon EF-2000 Eurofighter Basically the same as the Rafale, Advance Multi-role aircraft for the British and German Airforces... F/A 22A Raptor An Advance Tactical Aircraft for the Next generation, to replace the aging F-15.. would be great to have this aircraft in the game.. Semi-stealth fighter.. Ground Vehicles Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank A MBT for the British Forces.. a combat proven Tank used in the Gulf war and the recent War in Iraq. T-72 Medium Tank A older tank for the M48,M60 and Leopard 2 to blow up ^^ Possible Ground Troops?? RPG-7 Close Range Anti-tank Personnel.. LAW Close Range Anti-tank Personnel.. Naval Vessels CGN-38 Virginia Class An older vessel to match up to the Russian older ships counter-parts. Virginia class guided missile cruisers were equipped to fulfill multiple tasks in all warfare mission areas. PHM 1 Pegasus PHM 1 Pegasus hydrofoil boats were designed to operate offensively against hostile surface combatants and other surface craft; and conduct surveillance, screening and special operations. A Coastal patrol boat to compete with the Russian Tarantul class patrol vessel.. <--- Does it even fire the SS-N-22 missile in the game?
Dmut Posted April 11, 2005 Posted April 11, 2005 forums has a tons of wishlists already, why to create another one? "There are five dangerous faults which may affect a general: recklessness, which leads to destruction; cowardice, which leads to capture; a hasty temper, which can be provoked by insults; a delicacy of honor which is sensitive to shame; over-solicitude for his men, which exposes him to worry and trouble." Sun Tzu [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic2354_5.gif[/sigpic]
Pilotasso Posted April 11, 2005 Posted April 11, 2005 Those vehicles cant be implemented by engine restrictions or lack of reliable info on them. thats what has been told on numerous threads. .
Andrew_McP Posted April 11, 2005 Posted April 11, 2005 forums has a tons of wishlists already, why to create another one? My wish for 1.2 is that ED ignore all wishlists ;-) Andrew McP
gamble Posted April 11, 2005 Posted April 11, 2005 I agree. Mass is not equal to class (see IL2 Forgotten Battles). Otherwise desire lists are which for Santa Claus Asus P6T | Intel i7 920 (2,67) @ 3,60 Ghz | Geforce GTX570 | Sound: Realtec onboard | 6 GB Kingston KHX 12800 DDR3 | Windows 7 Pro 64bit | SSD-HDD | TM WARTHOG # 01069
Bogun Posted April 11, 2005 Posted April 11, 2005 I agree. Mass is not equal to class (see IL2 Forgotten Battles). Otherwise desire lists are which for Santa Claus So far FC v1.1 does not measure up to IL-2 FB not in mass, nor quality… But now, when ED is not sharing profits with UBI, they may finally start paying attention to what users demand. And what’s currently lucking in FC are not as much new planes, but general feel of the game running “trouble free”, uncluttered User Interface, decent Mission Editor. Also having F-16 or F-18 in the game would not hurt… :) You can do more with a kind word and a gun, than with just kind word alone. - Al Capone
Andrew_McP Posted April 11, 2005 Posted April 11, 2005 when ED is not sharing profits with UBI, they may finally start paying attention to what users demand. ED may not be sharing the money, but how many copies of 1.1 do you think they'll sell? Probably nowhere near enough to fund even a tiny fraction of the improvements these wishlists always produce. ED have to stick to what they know they can realistically achieve, and that -- sadly -- has little to do with what we *think* they can achieve. We have to get used to paying more and expecting less... whether we like it or not :-) Andrew McP
Kovy Posted April 11, 2005 Posted April 11, 2005 ED have to stick to what they know they can realistically achieve, and that -- sadly -- has little to do with what we *think* they can achieve. :icon_pray 100% agree with that Asus A7N8X-E (nForce2) + Athlon XP3000 + Geforce 4 ti 4200 (64 MB) + drivers 66.93+ 1 GB ram (dual chanel mode) win 2000 sp4 + direct-X 9c
Bogun Posted April 11, 2005 Posted April 11, 2005 ...We have to get used to paying more and expecting less... whether we like it or not... No, no, no... Now it is up to us to popularize the game, to make people aware of LOMAC v1.1 and of what this game can give us, players… There so are many aviation related forums we can post our opinions, many reviews to write – we need to start cranking. Honestly, there wasn’t much publicity generated by UBI for old LOCON, just the distribution of boxed games on the shelves, where many of those boxes peacefully collect the dust even now… You can do more with a kind word and a gun, than with just kind word alone. - Al Capone
SuperKungFu Posted April 11, 2005 Posted April 11, 2005 This forum is just waiting to be attacked. You can read a lot about this over the ubi forums. First, you can probably get rid of the ground/sea units since this is an air combat sim. Second, you have the time area all wrong. This game is based around the 80’s and you want to add the F-22 and the Eurofighter!? The cockpit functions for those aircraft are not even de-classified yet so you can’t make an accurate model. Also, adding those aircraft in will be like putting on god-mode. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Andrew_McP Posted April 11, 2005 Posted April 11, 2005 Now it is up to us to popularize the game The LOMAC demos have been out there in the big wide world a long time. If they haven't sold the game to people, nothing will. (I've bought many games I didn't expect to like after looking at a demo). Ok, some of us also try to do our bit by making LOMAC movies which take a lot of time and effort. They ought to appeal to people who might not look at demos. But we're preaching to the converted. I've shown LOMAC movies to quite a few non-simmers, they all say "great movies!" but none of them want to fly planes. IMO simmers are probably born, not made. It's either in your nature to be fascinated enough by these things to learn dozens of keyboard controls, or it isn't :-) Andrew McP
Sky Eagle Posted April 11, 2005 Posted April 11, 2005 If u want these vehicle's in the game. Dont ask it too the dev's they got their plans already and are not gonna change it for u. If u want it make ur own model ;) There are alot of tutorials on the internet and trials can be found of 3Dmax and other stuff
Stratos Posted April 11, 2005 Posted April 11, 2005 I simply want a key combination that let you swing your wings back If you fly the Mig-23/27 I don't understand anything in russian except Davai Davai!
LawnDart Posted April 11, 2005 Posted April 11, 2005 My only wish for 1.2 (or any future version) is a flyable F-16 (for obvious reasons ;) )!!! Heck, if they can do a 15 I'm sure they can muster up an equally good 16... My two cents... LawnDart [sigpic]http://www.virtualthunderbirds.com/Signatures/sig_LD.jpg[/sigpic] Virtual Thunderbirds, LLC | Sponsored by Thrustmaster Corsair 750D Case | Corsair RM850i PSU | ASUS ROG MAXIMUS X CODE | 32GB Corsair DDR4 3200 | Intel i7-8086K | Corsair Hydro H100i v2 Cooler | EVGA GTX 1080 Ti FTW | Oculus Rift | X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty | Samsung SSD 970 EVO 1TB NVMe | Samsung SSD 850 EVO 1TB | WD Caviar Black 2 x 1TB | TM HOTAS Warthog | TM Pendular Rudder | TM MFD Cougar Pack | 40" LG 1080p LED | Win10 |
Stormin Posted April 11, 2005 Posted April 11, 2005 I doubt ED will be adding much more to Lock On. Efforts will most likely be toward another simulation that is not encumbered by the Lock On name being owned by Ubi Soft. Why add to a product that is restricted by the limits placed upon it by a publisher that abandoned it years ago? I say it is time to move on and do the next product, a full simulation, not an add on for Lock On. I would also expect that the modular approach will be something to consider as well. Attention should be applied to individual flyable aircraft instead of having multiple flyable aircraft with the first release. Just my opinions.
MBot Posted April 11, 2005 Posted April 11, 2005 I agree with Carl. I would even go so far and say ED should only make only a single flyable plane in the first release and concentrate it's resources on other vital aspects that have been neglected in the past ( AI, comms, editor, campaign etc. ). Even back in the golden times of flightsimulations, when developers enjoyed large budgets and support by strong publishers, developers had their hands full of work with just one flyable plane. In todays times with very limited budgets, multple flyable planes can only be realised by taking away resources from other parts of the simulation IMOH ( Lock On seems to underline that theory ). But I know that I am most likely one of few with that opinion. A simulation with just only a single plane doesn't seems to be enough those days. P.S.: Sorry for going OT, I know the original poster talked about AI planes only.
SUBS17 Posted April 12, 2005 Posted April 12, 2005 forums has a tons of wishlists already, why to create another one? Then you should make a separate sub-forum for wish lists like the one at UBI so the team can find new ideas from one place for future flight sims. Or as a minimum a sticky thread, but considering the popularity of v1.1 and lockon a subforum is probably the way to go. :icon_supe [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC]
SUBS17 Posted April 12, 2005 Posted April 12, 2005 Those vehicles cant be implemented by engine restrictions or lack of reliable info on them. thats what has been told on numerous threads. There is as much information on those tanks available as there is for the M1, the aircraft would be another story but I see nothing wrong with that list for lockons successor rather than for v1.2 [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC]
SUBS17 Posted April 12, 2005 Posted April 12, 2005 I agree with Carl. I would even go so far and say ED should only make only a single flyable plane in the first release and concentrate it's resources on other vital aspects that have been neglected in the past ( AI, comms, editor, campaign etc. ). Even back in the golden times of flightsimulations, when developers enjoyed large budgets and support by strong publishers, developers had their hands full of work with just one flyable plane. In todays times with very limited budgets, multple flyable planes can only be realised by taking away resources from other parts of the simulation IMOH ( Lock On seems to underline that theory ). But I know that I am most likely one of few with that opinion. A simulation with just only a single plane doesn't seems to be enough those days. P.S.: Sorry for going OT, I know the original poster talked about AI planes only. True but it must have lots of add-ons in order to survive and should also have the ability to incorporate other sim types for it too boost sales by expanding into other sim types. [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC]
Recommended Posts