ED, I think I found a great source of info on F16

[Cobra360]

If Fighterops can do it, I don't see why ED can't. Besides it would be good for on-line training missions. Nothing wrong with flying a two seater with the guy in the back doing nothing, is there? Plus the good thing about the F-16 is that you skinners can put the markings of up to 22 countries on them.

[Pilotasso]

That's two seater,there won't be two seaters flyable :P :D

Well we have single seaters widely avaiable for anyone!

Realy!

[Olgerd]

If Fighterops can do it, I don't see why ED can't. Besides it would be good for on-line training missions. Nothing wrong with flying a two seater with the guy in the back doing nothing, is there? Plus the good thing about the F-16 is that you skinners can put the markings of up to 22 countries on them.

 

I don't think that it would be the right choice to allow to be in the second cockpit and then don't give any avionics and plane control ability to the second guy. Even if to implement in this way, the second pilot must to see something happens with MFDs or switches as the pilot in the forward cockpit does something with them. Actually any avionics inputs are very discrete so it would not be too expencive to transfer them via network. There are some problems with axes state transfer (for example TDC position), but I think it is possible too.

[SUBS17]

We are thinking about it. As it is well known there is two very complicated areas - network (two players controls one aircraft) and AI. We have not ready solutions yet, but we wanna do it.

 

I would have thought that experiences from 1.02s two seater mods could have helped in this area. Remember 2 seaters can be modeled in a number of ways. Human 2nd pilot or AI or pit switching.

[ThirdELTPoznan]

Olgerd are you going to model also Blk 52+?

[MBot]

I know it is an old discussion, but the choice of the F-16 still surprises me. With the continuation of the Falcon series and Fighter Ops we will yet again see the sim world flooded with F-16s.

[Dmut]

ED have choosed F-16 because they has all (well, almost all) documentation about it, including weapon systems and radar usage.

I guess they would gladly delevop F-18 if only they has all neccasary info about it.

[adi-Michael]

Hi ALL ;)

I think that to implement the F16C in Lock-On would be fantastic.. :p

Our Italian Team is awaiting this from a long time.. I believe that Flaming Cliffs is the best combat flight simulator around, however some of our pilots is in love with Falcon 4 (Microprose) and they are trying out the latest version (Allied Force).

If in the simulator will implement the F-16 or another good US strike plane, lock on could become the best simulator in all senses and therefore eliminating the threat of Falcon 4 "Allied Force".

Falcon 4.0 was a great game, and did his time. Now maybe Lock-On will be his next evolution with the introduction of the F-16.

This is my opinion. It would be a great step adding the F-16 and would render this simulator complete under every point of view for the American Coalition.

Sorry for my bad english..

 

{adi}-Michael CO Air Dominators Italia

http://www.ad-ita.it

From Italian community

[Cobra360]

Olgerd are you going to model also Blk 52+?

 

The Blk 52+ is too advanced to be modeled exactly, and since these F-16s use the APG-68V9 radars which are currently the most advanced ever fitted to the F-16 until the V-10 come out in a few years. Most of the radar performance and in particular it's SAR ground mapping modes are classified.

 

The model ED want to do is the Blk 50/52D. These have fully HARM and HTS capability but cannot use JDAMs, WCMDs or JSOWs. And use the slightly older APG-68V5 radars which can be modeled more accurately.

[Pilotasso]

I think its time to move on from F4. I want to see ED's aproach to my favourite plane. Specialy when it will probably feature AFM wich is something I cannot say from F4.

 

No matter how many SIM's were made of it I have yet to find 2 of them that implements the aircraft the same way!

 

An F-16 SIM will always sell well, throw in its nemesis fighters as flyables and it will be irresistable! To my knowelege no one has donne that yet with any depth of detail in each aircraft.

[Prophet_169th]

So what is your forcast for the LOMAC sucessor then?

 

FO says around 2-3quarter 2006.

 

Will they be selling at the same time?

 

image, 2 kick ass sims to fly at once.

[Cobra360]

Around 2-3 quarter 2007 would be more like it. Look how long Lockon took from Flanker 2.5.

 

One thing though, will ED be getting a publisher for the LOMAC sucessor or will it be on-line only and through Naturalpoint and Simw like FC.

[609_Recon]

I'd rather see updates, like a dynamic campaign, build on the current engine. Constant rewriting of engines seems to take way too long. They build this Lomac engine, has a great sense of flight, etc.... we have several flyable aircraft, etc.... I know a F16 sounds great, and I welcome it - but I also think new aircraft is only a part. An immersive single/multiplayer campaign system would really raise the stakes for Lomac.

 

I haven't flown F4, but the part that appeals to me is when people talk about the dynamic campaign system. The rest of it to me sounds like overkill (to me).

 

Not to cast a shadow, but honestly, I'm surprised when I heard the developers were adding a flyable helicopter to this sim - it really isn't what I think of when I think of Lomac - a jet study sim. Seems better effort could be placed elsewhere.

[britgliderpilot]

I think its time to move on from F4. I want to see ED's aproach to my favourite plane. Specialy when it will probably feature AFM wich is something I cannot say from F4.

 

No matter how many SIM's were made of it I have yet to find 2 of them that implements the aircraft the same way!

 

An F-16 SIM will always sell well, throw in its nemesis fighters as flyables and it will be irresistable! To my knowelege no one has donne that yet with any depth of detail in each aircraft.

 

Ah, the wonders of Dissimilar Air Combat . . . . such a sim would indeed (as I believe the current generation say), "r0xx0r yuor b0xx0r5!1!!!one1!" :p

 

 

The only problem is that you'd get accusations of bias and overmodelling, probably from both sides. Not sure there are many ways around that . . . . grin.

 

 

IMO, a serious rework of the AI and theatre would be required for Lomac to be truly great. Don't get me wrong, I love Lomac . . . . but it could be much, much better.

 

I'm a bit sceptical of those who wave the "Dynamic Campaign" flag around as if it's all-powerful. Dynamic Campaign isn't everything - Falcon 4 could have had a dynamic mission generator and still flopped.

 

The thing that makes the F4 theatre incredible for me is the way you feel part of a huge effort - and that has little to do with the way the missions follow on from each other, and everything to do with the other units in theatre at the time.

Making it possible to have many units in theatre and good performance, making the AI work properly, and working in radio comms to all these packages . . . . . all of a sudden, you'd have a simply awesome theatre. Immersion would skyrocket. Generating the missions is (comparatively speaking) easy when put against the problem of theatre immersion.

[britgliderpilot]

Around 2-3 quarter 2007 would be more like it. Look how long Lockon took from Flanker 2.5.

 

One thing though, will ED be getting a publisher for the LOMAC sucessor or will it be on-line only and through Naturalpoint and Simw like FC.

 

I prefer to say "eventually". Try to set or guess a date, and all of a sudden people start taking it as gospel and get very disappointed (loudly disappointed :p ) when you miss it. And nothing ever makes the deadline that you want it to . . . . Murphy's Law.

 

 

Word is that after the Ubi debacle, ED is switching to "an entirely new business model". The original intention was indeed to sell only online . . . . and now that the troubles have been (mostly) ironed out after the initial (somewhat troublesome) release of Flaming Cliffs, it looks like they've got a business model that can work well.

 

Online and from SimWare and NaturalPoint. Aside from StarForce, which everyone seems to have problems with . . . . can anyone see any major issues with such a method of distribution?

[Cobra360]

Works for me, I'm too lazy to go to the shops, so buying from SimWare suits me better. As for Starforce, I don't even know its there. Never had any trouble from it ever and I have SH3 which has Starforce aswell. I'm just happy ED keep improving and making sims.

[Pilotasso]

Ah, the wonders of Dissimilar Air Combat . . . . such a sim would indeed (as I believe the current generation say), "r0xx0r yuor b0xx0r5!1!!!one1!" :p

 

 

The only problem is that you'd get accusations of bias and overmodelling, probably from both sides. Not sure there are many ways around that . . . . grin.

 

Too Late! We already had a dose of that with LOMAC. Its innevitable. If particular aircraft doesnt correspond to what its fans expect against others online they will always complain.

 

It wont make a difference if its F-15, F-16 or F-18. But I dont think it will matter much, in thousands of die hard simmers theres always naysayers. Its a statistical certainty!

[Pilotasso]

I'd rather see updates, like a dynamic campaign, build on the current engine. Constant rewriting of engines seems to take way too long. They build this Lomac engine, has a great sense of flight, etc.... we have several flyable aircraft, etc.... I know a F16 sounds great, and I welcome it - but I also think new aircraft is only a part. An immersive single/multiplayer campaign system would really raise the stakes for Lomac.

 

Actualy the idea of a dynamic campaign without new fighters would kill the interest of the campaign in the first place.

 

With current aircraft you could only make specialized tasks and in a dynamic scenario you cant win by dominating a particular component of the action alone. And immersion would suffer along with it.

[Pilotasso]

So what is your forcast for the LOMAC sucessor then?

 

FO says around 2-3quarter 2006.

 

Will they be selling at the same time?

 

image, 2 kick ass sims to fly at once.

 

LOMAC took 3 years. Dont expect anything before 2009, because they wont start it before next year. Theres still LOMAC 1.2 before it.

[EvilBivol-1]

Actually, ED seems to plan to be working on two products at any given time, where one is the next thing to be released and one to be the next 'big thing'. Right now that schedule might be offset somewhat by the work on the 1.11 patch, but the idea is to have no more than a year's break between major releases. Also, if you noticed, ED has shifted focus to smaller scaled products, attempting to build a thorough model of one aircraft.

 

Not that I think the next product will be released any time soon... :)

[SUBS17]

I prefer to say "eventually". Try to set or guess a date, and all of a sudden people start taking it as gospel and get very disappointed (loudly disappointed :p ) when you miss it. And nothing ever makes the deadline that you want it to . . . . Murphy's Law.

 

 

Word is that after the Ubi debacle, ED is switching to "an entirely new business model". The original intention was indeed to sell only online . . . . and now that the troubles have been (mostly) ironed out after the initial (somewhat troublesome) release of Flaming Cliffs, it looks like they've got a business model that can work well.

 

Online and from SimWare and NaturalPoint. Aside from StarForce, which everyone seems to have problems with . . . . can anyone see any major issues with such a method of distribution?

 

You won't reach the whole community by not putting games on shop shelves. As well as that the size of lockons successor rules out any option of just downloading it. Due to it being the next generation it'll probably be on DVDROM. Naturalpoint however would work but you will only reach 1/3 flight simmers just doing it online. Advertising and possibly distributing it too shops by your own publishing would be more likely to sell more copies.

[Pilotasso]

[...]the idea is to have no more than a year's break between major releases

 

Also, if you noticed, ED has shifted focus to smaller scaled products, attempting to build a thorough model of one aircraft.

 

Not that I think the next product will be released any time soon... :)

 

This contradicts somewhat what has been the intentions expressed here by ED staff. As far as I could tell there was the intention to have more than 1 aircraft as flyable in an eventual LOCKON successor. Has anything changed?

 

Or did I get it wrong?

[britgliderpilot]

You won't reach the whole community by not putting games on shop shelves. As well as that the size of lockons successor rules out any option of just downloading it. Due to it being the next generation it'll probably be on DVDROM. Naturalpoint however would work but you will only reach 1/3 flight simmers just doing it online. Advertising and possibly distributing it too shops by your own publishing would be more likely to sell more copies.

 

Very true - but would it be worth the extra expenditure and/or hassle?

 

The chances of ED finding a publisher for a new fast jet flight sim are minimal - so I reckon they're going to have to go ahead and self-publish.

 

Question is - do ED have enough cash to finance putting boxes on shelves all over the world?

Ubisoft did, but I'm really not sure that ED could do that.

 

It would be great to be able to advertise and have boxed versions of your flight sim in every high street store - but for a thirty-man team based in Moscow, I think the chances of that are unlikely.

[609_Recon]

well, with threads like this : http://www.simhq.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=127;t=003809

 

This is a serious problem for FC if people are afraid to buy it because of Starforce - I imagine it's hard enough to get enough consumers, let alone have people talk about it like they do in that thread.

 

Although, the money lost on people stealing games is attrocious.

[EvilBivol-1]

This contradicts somewhat what has been the intentions expressed here by ED staff. As far as I could tell there was the intention to have more than 1 aircraft as flyable in an eventual LOCKON successor. Has anything changed?

 

Or did I get it wrong?

 

I think you got it wrong. :) What gave you that idea? Of course, I might be wrong as well... or technically, since we're talking about future products, who knows...?