The Battle Sim????

[BullsEye]

Somebody can try to explain me what is this project??

 

http://www.thebattlesim.com/

 

 

:icon_roll :icon_roll :D

[britgliderpilot]

It's The Fighter Collection trying to sell Lomac as a training tool for the defence industry. As such, some features are exaggerated, and some future directions are also a little exaggerated.

 

 

It would be very cool to have FAC and AWACS incorporated into Lomac, and we can but hope . . . . .

 

 

The Apache is the only new flyable we're actually likely to see IN LOMAC, and even that requires some serious tweaking to get the two-seater aspect right. The F16 is going to be part of it's own sim several years down the line, and the Hornet . . . . hey, how did the Hornet get on that list? It was mentioned as a possible next flyable IF ED got big corporate support way back before original release. Last I heard, they didn't have the information or resources to go ahead with it.

[BullsEye]

In my dream i was thinking for a game that covers all the aspect of modern combat

 

Airplane (Lock on 1.1)

Helicopter (Lock on 1.2)

Tank (Lock on 2.0)

Navy (lock on 3.0)

 

and so on

 

:icon_frow

[Olgerd]

In my dream i was thinking for a game that covers all the aspect of modern combat

 

Airplane (Lock on 1.1)

Helicopter (Lock on 1.2)

Tank (Lock on 2.0)

Navy (lock on 3.0)

 

and so on

 

:icon_frow

 

It is my dream too. I hope we will do it sooner or later. :D

[Glowing_Amraam]

my dream is all those combined :D :D

[BullsEye]

Olgerd for a project like that i'm the first that give founds to ED.

 

i'm not a software engineer but i think that is not impossible.

Lock on 1.2 proves this...the first Helo in a Airplane sim.

 

Probably in the future you can add a Tank

[gustav]

Please stick to air combat...

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

The future is a digital battlefield not just air combat.

 

To stick to just air combat would be suicide.

 

I would agree with that! can you imagine 500 people flying on line, playing ONE game, ONE mission, ONE map, airplanes, chopers, tanks, artilery ....

[suntrace1]

Yes, it's called Battlefield 2.

[GGTharos]

No, operation flashpoint 3.

 

Sorry, but BF isn't realistic ;)

[169th_Moose]

Yes, it's called Battlefield 2.

 

Not that true, I'm a big fan of BF2, 64Players maps are havoc. Lots of issues with lag, you have to continually search for best ping rank server.

 

Something I would like to see in LoMac is what Bf2 has to offer: The details stats they have on there rank servers would be cool to have as a feature …

 

 

example (your best plane, your best bully online, your best target, your weapons of choice, your favorite coalitions and such. More stats the better)

 

The present pilot logbook features in lomac, as it present state. Is pretty much useless. Constantly editing the file in question is a freaking pain. Reason why I don’t care for it anymore. Unless Ed updates this feature, they should take it off. Since is worthless as it is.

 

Don’t get me wrong. The idea is great. But once you die...resurrecting and such...it’s gets boring...We need more “Steak” in that area.

 

My 2cents.

 

Cheers

[SUBS17]

The present pilot logbook features in lomac, as it present state. Is pretty much useless. Constantly editing the file in question is a freaking pain. Reason why I don’t care for it anymore. Unless Ed updates this feature, they should take it off. Since is worthless as it is.

 

Don’t get me wrong. The idea is great. But once you die...resurrecting and such...it’s gets boring...We need more “Steak” in that area.

 

My 2cents.

 

Cheers

 

Thats exactly right, in a way Lockon is very realistic but the fact is you will get killed online. Thats why I prefer F4s pilot logbook since as it has a death counter rather than loss of life equaling loss of stats. One can always hope that this feature could be changed since as pilot stats are a great way to tell how much a pilot has accomplished. Also F4AF features the ability for other pilots to see your stats on a server.

[suntrace1]

Thats exactly right, in a way Lockon is very realistic but the fact is you will get killed online. Thats why I prefer F4s pilot logbook since as it has a death counter rather than loss of life equaling loss of stats. One can always hope that this feature could be changed since as pilot stats are a great way to tell how much a pilot has accomplished. Also F4AF features the ability for other pilots to see your stats on a server.

 

 

Great idea, recommend it in the thread for the upcoming patch.

[akdavis]

The future is a digital battlefield not just air combat.

 

To stick to just air combat would be suicide.

 

 

This has been said since Falcon 3.0 (remember all the talk of interconnected sims). It has never happened effectively, and it is not going to happen anytime soon. Closest you could get to this model is WWII Online, and I'm sure we are all mostly aware of the problems there. OpFlash is an infantry sim. The armor and aircraft and just ornaments. Decent authenticity but no fidelity. Armor in LOMAC would be the same. A compromise resulting in a below average armor sim and a degraded flight sim.

[ARM505]

It doesn't have to be 'degraded'. But it probably would be in practice. I still believe that some sort of combat sim network 'protocol' is a justifiable, and do-able goal....

 

What I'm saying is that the lack of fidelity is a design choice, not some kind of limitation. There's no technical reason why a 'Steel Beasts' level of realism could not be incorporated into a flight sim. Its obvious why they choose to do it this way (budget limitations), but some kind of modular, multi stage project (as LOMAC) seems to be, could be viable. And some kind of common protocol would help, bearing in mind the requirements of 'platform simulation', not just involving aircraft.

[Olgerd]

It doesn't have to be 'degraded'. But it probably would be in practice. I still believe that some sort of combat sim network 'protocol' is a justifiable, and do-able goal....

 

What I'm saying is that the lack of fidelity is a design choice, not some kind of limitation. There's no technical reason why a 'Steel Beasts' level of realism could not be incorporated into a flight sim. Its obvious why they choose to do it this way (budget limitations), but some kind of modular, multi stage project (as LOMAC) seems to be, could be viable. And some kind of common protocol would help, bearing in mind the requirements of 'platform simulation', not just involving aircraft.

 

There are very reasonable technical problems (if you want to stay somewhere near of desired release dates).

It is easy to say, but... extremely hard to perform while you've not a good set of flexible interfaces. One of the most important - you must to start developing already having this technology completely ready to incorporate in your code. Actually you must base your design/code development on this technology, overwise it will be nightmare.

[Wild.Bill.Kelso]

The Apache is the only new flyable we're actually likely to see IN LOMAC, and even that requires some serious tweaking to get the two-seater aspect right.

I've been away for a while, but I thought the next version was going to add the KA-50 Russian chopper, not the Apache. Did something change?

[ALDEGA]

No, operation flashpoint 3.

Did you mean OF2?

[GGTharos]

No I mean 3 - the yet non-existant, imaginary flashpoint ;)

[SUBS17]

I think Ships are the way to go, that plus carrier aircraft(yeah F-14, F/A-18C, A6, A7) and ASW modelling(S3 and P3). Then Airwolves and Seawolves would be able to work together. It might happen one day.