Talk about throwing down the gauntlet . . .

[enigma6584]

They got me drooling again! This is gonna be fun. I really hope they can pull something like this off. Going to start saving for that new rig today.

[Oceandar]

If it is ONLY intended for these purposes, you don't need a dynamic campaign. Designing scenarios by hand for RL military training purposes is better than trying to create a dynamic campaign.

Seriously - the military aren't there for the fun of playing the campaign, they're there to try and teach pilots to fly and fight in the Falcon.

Bah...I`m little bit confuse here. Is this for military or for us ? If they`re gonna release it for us then dynamic campaign is a MUST !!! nuff said !

 

Nevertheless this project is a great news !!! Good luck to ED

[D-Scythe]

To get a DC that works correctly will be an almost insurmountable task. As good as Lead Pursuit has fixed F4's DC, it's still bug ridden.

 

Well, it can be argued that a simpler DC can be incorporated into a LOMAC sequel. F4:AF's DC was like a mini-strategy game in and of itself, with engineer units, supply, etc. etc. Having a much simpler DC, for example one that would keep tally of enemy aircraft, airfield and ground troops destruction, would be infinitely better than the campaign engine we have now.

[Oceandar]

To get a DC that works correctly will be an almost insurmountable task. As good as Lead Pursuit has fixed F4's DC, it's still bug ridden.

Oh..well...lets assume ED guys are much more skillfull than LP, at least at PR area I know ED guys are :D

[britgliderpilot]

Bah...I`m little bit confuse here. Is this for military or for us ? If they`re gonna release it for us then dynamic campaign is a MUST !!! nuff said !

 

Nevertheless this project is a great news !!! Good luck to ED

 

Could do with a better translation, but the babelfished interview DOES say that the sim will be used for training real pilots.

 

I don't know of any group flying the F16 that isn't military - so I'd guess they're a primary customer. If they're paying for development (even if they're allowing ED to release it to us), they may frown upon their time and money being used to develop something they're not going to use.

 

See the point?

[Oceandar]

Could do with a better translation, but the babelfished interview DOES say that the sim will be used for training real pilots.

 

I don't know of any group flying the F16 that isn't military - so I'd guess they're a primary customer. If they're paying for development (even if they're allowing ED to release it to us), they may frown upon their time and money being used to develop something they're not going to use.

 

See the point?

Ok, but how would you know they`re not going to use it ?

[britgliderpilot]

Ok, but how would you know they`re not going to use it ?

 

I don't.

 

 

I'm just speculating as to what relative strengths and weaknesses of this new sim could be. As we know, it's extremely difficult to get a detailed Dynamic Campaign working well. If they're not being paid to develop one, that's another reason to not bother.

 

 

See the point?

[Oceandar]

See the point?

"I'm just speculating" isn`t it ?? ;)

[britgliderpilot]

"I'm just speculating" isn`t it ?? ;)

 

Yep!

 

 

I'm speculating, everyone else is speculating, and I'm choosing to believe that my speculation has more basis in fact than the "OMFGzor5 t3h fi6 s1m w1ll h4v3 t3h r0xx0r1ng dyn41c c4mp41gn!11!one!!!1!!" speculation.

[Oceandar]

Yep!

 

 

I'm speculating, everyone else is speculating, and I'm choosing to believe that my speculation has more basis in fact than the "OMFGzor5 t3h fi6 s1m w1ll h4v3 t3h r0xx0r1ng dyn41c c4mp41gn!11!one!!!1!!" speculation.

Hehehe....then lets speculate :D

[kam]

Hehehe....then lets speculate :D

 

Well I suppose to save time, money and effort, the tank buster and F-16 projects will use the same engine..so they may well integrate to make a 'virtual battlefield' :horseback :horseback

[Pilotasso]

Thats speculative speculation. :s

[Oceandar]

Thats speculative speculation. :s

Hehehe that could be hurt :)

[EvilBivol-1]

AAAAAAAAHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!1!!!1!!

 

:D

[Floyd]

Correct, the order of projects:

 

1- 1.11 patch for FC

2- 1.2 add-on for Lock On (Ka-50)

3- "Tank Killers"

4- F-16 project in the eastern Med

 

-Matt

 

Well, this leaves some room for speculation. The patch should be out within 2 or 3 months,

maybe within weeks. The 1.2 addon is said to be out December 2005 (optimistic) or maybe

December 2006? If "Tank Killers" will be based on the LockOn engine/environment, it's

development might start some time before 1.2 release. Remember how often we've

heard what small company ED is (most of the time when we wanted to see new stuff

implemented). Ok, let's plan the release for ... December 2007.

 

Now they plan a complete new sim, superior to F4. How much time does this take?

4-5 years, and if they start in 2006 we might see "something" in 2010/2011.

 

Ok, keep on dreaming about incredible AI and dynamic campaigns ...

[Oceandar]

Remember how often we've

heard what small company ED is

Also, remember how often we`ve heard these words "size doesn`t matter" :)

 

Ok, keep on dreaming about incredible AI and dynamic campaigns ...

Flying to the Moon was a dream isn`t it ? ;)

[kdittyr]

Flying to the Moon was a dream isn`t it ? ;)

 

Well, ED is nothing in comparisson to the size of NASA at that time. And, yes, for the Russians flying to the moon is still a dream... well, at least landing on it is.

[Prophet_169th]

OT: On the moon thing. I never understood why we havent gone back. I mean it was such a big deal, back when I was just being thought of.

 

Maybe ED will land on the moon!!!!

[Muttley]

Correct, the order of projects:

1- 1.11 patch for FC

2- 1.2 add-on for Lock On (Ka-50)

3- "Tank Killers"

4- F-16 project in the eastern Med

 

Hey Matt,

 

Tnx for the info. The sequence seems pretty logical to me, specially if the gfx (or at least environment) engine developed for Tank Killers serves as the foundation for the F-16 project.

 

Good luck!

[Wags]

Welcome. Just please remember that this is simply a summation of what was relayed in the interview.

 

Aside from 1.11 and 1.2, the rest is all just pie in the sky right now. As such, I would not hang your hat on any dates and features; all could well change. Also, just because something was not stated as being a feature of one of these products hardly means that it won't be addressed (like campaign engine, AI, etc.). Not you in particular, but some of you are reading WAY too much into that interview.

 

-Matt

 

Hey Matt,

 

Tnx for the info. The sequence seems pretty logical to me, specially if the gfx (or at least environment) engine developed for Tank Killers serves as the foundation for the F-16 project.

 

Good luck!

[airea]

What would Tank Killers be based on, I mean, will it be sth. like a-10 versus su-25t, or a-10, su-25t and ka-50? Will it have more sophisticated ground grapichs, will we see other flyables?

[192nd_Erdem]

It says A-10,AH-64 and Su-25,Ka-50.

 

Btw check your PM airea :)

[SUBS17]

OT: On the moon thing. I never understood why we havent gone back. I mean it was such a big deal, back when I was just being thought of.

 

Maybe ED will land on the moon!!!!

 

They never returnned to the moon after Apollo 13! From what I have read.

[kam]

What would Tank Killers be based on, I mean, will it be sth. like a-10 versus su-25t, or a-10, su-25t and ka-50? Will it have more sophisticated ground grapichs, will we see other flyables?

 

Well Im guessing it'll be Su-25T, A-10 and Ka-50 versus tanks ;)

[Shaman]

Don't go too crazy about it

 

Aside from 1.11 and 1.2, the rest is all just pie in the sky right now. As such, I would not hang your hat on any dates and features; all could well change. Also, just because something was not stated as being a feature of one of these products hardly means that it won't be addressed (like campaign engine, AI, etc.). Not you in particular, but some of you are reading WAY too much into that interview.

 

-Matt

Yeah. Wags is right. That is exactly how I felt about you guys after reading this entire thread. I wouldn't expect nothing from ED. I'll just wait and see what ED comes up with in next few years. I don't want to be dissapointed. There is to much expectations, speculations, wishes and drolling happening already. I remember same happened when LOMAC was in early development. Then when it was almost finished, community was informed about features droped.. and what happened next? Everyone knows.

 

So don't go too crazy about it!