Please don't say it is so...

[Manny]

Starlight: "You're late dude. I'm already playing with ED's F-16 sim right now. And "tank killers" is history here.... "

 

An ED F-16? This can not be true!! Does the combat flight simulation community not have enough F-16s to bleed a dead horse dry?

 

Does ED really consider success in its' combat flight simulator sales tied to how many US built military aircraft it can put in Lock-On? How pathetic!!

 

At a time when over-saturation is the norm and there is a lack of Soviet built aircraft in combat simulators (except where relegated to dumb AI), ED's role is never more important to ensure these aircraft are represented.

 

Falcon 4.0: Allied Force is released! How would an F-16 improve sales for ED?

 

This is quite disapointing for me as I expected ED to lead the role in developing Soviet-built aircraft. I applaud both ED and 1C Games for providing a "glimpse" into another era of aviation little to no interest or empasis has been applied for someone like myself living in the US.

 

I also congratulate Ed for their bold approach to the Ka-50 but I still want my Ka-52 with an "PANIC:AUTOKILL F-16s" button :icon_evil

 

Bahh whatever!! Decisions decisions and I am sure ED has made their bed and they now have to lay in it. I had hoped the direction they took was not to turn Lock-On, a combat simulator whose roots were founded in the Su-27, into "another" boring simulation of boring, over-simulated and beat to death US aircraft.

 

BAH HUMBUG!! Cheers :icon_jook

[Pilotasso]

ED's aproach will be better on the area of flight simming itself. F-4's FM and missile behaviour stinks. For once I would like to have a sim of a manuerable jet with realistic sense of flight and convincing missile perfomance (this will be a first ever). More: it will be in the mythical midle east scenario, wich has long been forgotten from the flight sim scene.

 

Bear in mind THATS YOUR OPINION. There are others thrilled by it. Mine is that ED couldnt have chosen a better plane to couple with the mig29K in another jet pakage SIM. You cant beat that combo. Not with a SIM with less than 8 years old. ;)

[192nd_Erdem]

Oh come on,can't you see the whiners around?There have been many posts on how "unbalanced" sides because they only add Soviet aircrafts right now...What a shame,they should have added a western aircraft 43534098x times modelled in other games :)

 

Ok,sarcasm off.I just want a "true" Su-27 or Mig-29 sim,and only ED can do this :(

[S77th-GOYA]

Does ED really consider success in its' combat flight simulator sales tied to how many US built military aircraft it can put in Lock-On?

 

Seriously, Manny. Use your eyes and your brain.

 

How many US flyables in LOMAC?

In Flamming Cliffs?

In Black Shark?

 

Then answer about Russian flyables.

[Pilotasso]

Oh come on,can't you see the whiners around?There have been many posts on how "unbalanced" sides because they only add Soviet aircrafts right now...What a shame,they should have added a western aircraft 43534098x times modelled in other games :)

 

Ok,sarcasm off.I just want a "true" Su-27 or Mig-29 sim,and only ED can do this :(

 

 

Theres a big difference between what we can wish and what can be programed with base in the current declassifyed info. I wouldnt say the MIg-29K to be utterly inferior, I do preffer the F-16, but the russian bird is sure to score alot of points online once that game is out. I love the idea to place myself in the shoes of an "evil syrian" pilot and kick some israeli ass...(I hope the K is one of those with westernized HUD, I hate soviet style HUD's)

 

I also love LOMAC but it loses alot by the limited weapon types carried by its aircraft. Going sead againt patriots and S300's is a bad Idea with A-10, and Su-25, same with a mig or a sue with iron bombs. the possible startegical plots with multirole aircraft in a multi jet SIM would be unique also.

[Manny]

ED's aproach will be better on the area of flight simming itself. F-4's FM and missile behaviour stinks. For once I would like to have a sim of a manuerable jet with realistic sense of flight and convincing missile perfomance (this will be a first ever). More: it will be in the mythical midle east scenario, wich has long been forgotten from the flight sim scene.

 

Bear in mind THATS YOUR OPINION. There are others thrilled by it. Mine is that ED couldnt have chosen a better plane to couple with the mig29K in another jet pakage SIM. You cant beat that combo. Not with a SIM with less than 8 years old. ;)

 

Yes, Pilotasso, we are here to express opinions and I am sure to freely express mine. I will tackle your opinion from the ground up with a rebuttal of my own. Fact is ED's decision is based entirely off the notion that in order to sell a combat flight simulator outside the former Soviet Union (particularly Russia), it must contain specific appeal to the Fanbois, i.e. a US manufactured, over-simulated, and boring combat aircraft.

 

It is a fact Lock-On could have the same appeal to the combat flight sim community without US modeled aircraft in it. In place of the F-15 we could have, for the first time, a MiG-25 or MiG-31, a MiG-21, an Su-37, or an Su-30. In place of an A-10, a MiG-23. Was an appropriate market study performed to determine if a simulation of only Russian aircraft could sell? Perhaps not but then again Su-27 never made it beyond Demo to Flanker 2.5 on a wing and a prayer enough to sustain development and launch ED into Lock-On.

 

Again, I do applaud ED's desire to keep folks like me, a US citizen, satisfied they are at least developing the aircraft I wanna fly, particularly Russian birds. Is bundling the MiG-29K, Navalized version of the Mig-29 that was in Flanker 2.5 and should have been in Lock-On, gonna make having an F-16 in an ED sim more appealing to me? Absolutely not! Perhaps to those Fanbois who need a little extra incentive to buy a combat sim that contains another aircraft but the F-16 -- perhaps where Spectrum Holobyte went wrong in discontinuing their development of the MiG-29 and F/A-18.

 

Nonetheless, Falcon 4: Allied Force may have critics but certainly their die-hard and enthusiast level is not to be challenged and I feel certain ED's sim will not turn their heads away especially with the Falcon 4 Superpak available and the endless mods for that sim thanks to a cleverly designed rouse to leak the source code of Falcon 4.

 

Also, don't say the Middle East is a forgotten theatre since nearly every simulator to date featuring US aircraft has some Campaign or mission-set designed to operate in the Middle East. No, rather the forgotten conflicts are those that never happened, over Russia, over the Crimean Penninsual, Over the Baltics, etc.

 

I will still support ED but I will not lend that support to their F-16 Sim. I do look forward to the Hokum though.

[Manny]

Seriously, Manny. Use your eyes and your brain.

 

How many US flyables in LOMAC?

In Flamming Cliffs?

In Black Shark?

 

Then answer about Russian flyables.

 

Come on Goya, climb down outta the pit of your F-15 and expand your horizon. The success of ED was founded on it's flanker product, period!

 

BTW, last I checked, Janes made a more realistic F-15 sim than ED did.

 

Ok, you may want to see more US flyable in Lock-On, but some do not, particularly me, a paying customer .. 8O, no I didn't say that! I can express that opinion, I hope, without drawing AMMRAMS from Fanbois.

 

As for Russian flyable, last I checked, ED was a Russian combat sim company, that made Russian combat aircraft for its' sim... way to go ED!!

 

I will state there is no equivalent to their A-10 though ever since Janes decided to scrap their A-10 plans ...shame!

 

However, I have an appreciation for positions and opinions. I simply state there are some aircraft best left alone to graze in their respective pastures and the F-16 is certainly one nearly every company that ever put out a sim has touched upon....yuck yuck yuck! Hell even the F-14 or Rafaale or somethingelse hardly touched upon would be more welcome by me and hitting my puter at release than an F-16 sim.

[S77th-GOYA]

So, you'd like to see all the flyables in ED's product to be Russian only.

 

And you throw around a word like "fanbois".

 

You have right to express your opinion and I have a right to think it is stupid.

[Alfa]

Guys,

 

Keep it civilised.

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[Manny]

So, you'd like to see all the flyables in ED's product to be Russian only.

 

And you throw around a word like "fanbois".

 

You have right to express your opinion and I have a right to think it is stupid.

 

:) , Goya, Goya be nice... LOL Ok so my liberal use of "Fanboi" is a bit polarized :icon_redf

 

No I do not think all flyables in ED's product should be Russian only and neither does ED :icon_wink

 

But, however, I would just like to see more focus on the stuff folks paid little attention to. That is all.

[Whisper]

PoV from a non Flanker user, new to ED world with LO :

 

I don't mind the jets modelled being US or RU or anything.

The thing I like is that they are rarely modelled.

An improved A-10 on par with current Su-25T model-wise would (will?) be awesome.

The focus on ground mission, CAS, etc... you find in LO/FC is alsosomething unique that I really like (being more of an infantry guy, playing OFP).

 

LO becoming another F15/16/18 sim ... well, why? Is this really needed?

Other AI controlled planes in LO would be better (I can't refrain to point to Mirage :P )

 

If the ground life is on par with fly sim for the Ka-50 sim, then chopper sim market is also another thing to dig . And not with Apache! Sry guys, this one is also a classic in simulation. Mi-24? AH-1?

 

But like said above, decision is probably already made. And there's a unfortunately very valid reason for this : available documentation .

*kicks Dassault in the nuts for this*

[GGTharos]

Manny, I'm a paying customer too, and I want western hardware. And yes, I fly the red birds, too - all of them.

 

The F-16 is certainly NOT the aircraft to be 'left alone'. It is one of the most widely used NATO planes! If youw anted to model a common NATO plane, the F-16 is IT - not to mention that the manuals for it are available, making it easier to know WHAT to model.

 

You guys are forgetting something: LOMAC is NOT becoming 'another F-16 Sim'. It's just ADDING an F-16.

[Whisper]

"It's just ADDING an F-16"

Where something else and never seen before could have been done instead. That's our point ;)

 

 

But the documentation issue kind of blast the whole argument apart. You do accurate modeling when you have acurate data.

[Manny]

Manny, I'm a paying customer too, and I want western hardware. And yes, I fly the red birds, too - all of them.

 

The F-16 is certainly NOT the aircraft to be 'left alone'. It is one of the most widely used NATO planes! If youw anted to model a common NATO plane, the F-16 is IT - not to mention that the manuals for it are available, making it easier to know WHAT to model.

 

You guys are forgetting something: LOMAC is NOT becoming 'another F-16 Sim'. It's just ADDING an F-16.

 

GG, thanks for chimin' in. As Whisper mentioned, if documentation is the limiting factor, then it is quite understood that an F-16 is added to the simulation.

 

I do understand the F-16 is highly exported. The Mirage is as well! I may never get what I want. That is ok. Perhaps if LO goes open source, we all will get what we want.

[Yellonet]

Yes, Pilotasso, we are here to express opinions and I am sure to freely express mine. I will tackle your opinion from the ground up with a rebuttal of my own. Fact is ED's decision is based entirely off the notion that in order to sell a combat flight simulator outside the former Soviet Union (particularly Russia), it must contain specific appeal to the Fanbois, i.e. a US manufactured, over-simulated, and boring combat aircraft.

 

It is a fact Lock-On could have the same appeal to the combat flight sim community without US modeled aircraft in it. In place of the F-15 we could have, for the first time, a MiG-25 or MiG-31, a MiG-21, an Su-37, or an Su-30. In place of an A-10, a MiG-23. Was an appropriate market study performed to determine if a simulation of only Russian aircraft could sell? Perhaps not but then again Su-27 never made it beyond Demo to Flanker 2.5 on a wing and a prayer enough to sustain development and launch ED into Lock-On.

 

Again, I do applaud ED's desire to keep folks like me, a US citizen, satisfied they are at least developing the aircraft I wanna fly, particularly Russian birds. Is bundling the MiG-29K, Navalized version of the Mig-29 that was in Flanker 2.5 and should have been in Lock-On, gonna make having an F-16 in an ED sim more appealing to me? Absolutely not! Perhaps to those Fanbois who need a little extra incentive to buy a combat sim that contains another aircraft but the F-16 -- perhaps where Spectrum Holobyte went wrong in discontinuing their development of the MiG-29 and F/A-18.

 

Nonetheless, Falcon 4: Allied Force may have critics but certainly their die-hard and enthusiast level is not to be challenged and I feel certain ED's sim will not turn their heads away especially with the Falcon 4 Superpak available and the endless mods for that sim thanks to a cleverly designed rouse to leak the source code of Falcon 4.

 

Also, don't say the Middle East is a forgotten theatre since nearly every simulator to date featuring US aircraft has some Campaign or mission-set designed to operate in the Middle East. No, rather the forgotten conflicts are those that never happened, over Russia, over the Crimean Penninsual, Over the Baltics, etc.

 

I will still support ED but I will not lend that support to their F-16 Sim. I do look forward to the Hokum though.

One of the great things with LockOn is that we can actually pit flyable eastern aircraft against flyable western aircraft... and you don't like that?

[britgliderpilot]

Look at it this way - ED will be doing an complex sim for an advanced MiG29 variant (because they have all the data and it rules), and want another flyable of similar size, capability, so on and so forth which is well documented.

 

The only logical choice is the F16.

(edit - a note here on the F/A-18. The critical manuals here are classified, in accordance with USN policy. While some sims have guessed while modelling the Hornet avionics and so forth, when you are pitting your aircraft against another human-flyable aircraft where that information is KNOWN, you just can't make it up according to what you think it should be.

Completely spoils any kind of realism.)

 

 

 

Word is that the avionics realism will be punched up rather further than the Su25T's (for both aircraft), and the graphics aren't exactly going to take a step backwards . . . . .

 

Sometimes people seem to forget that there's a MiG29 planned to go hand-in-hand with the Falcon . . . . don't!

 

 

 

 

 

I do understand the F-16 is highly exported. The Mirage is as well! I may never get what I want. That is ok. Perhaps if LO goes open source, we all will get what we want.

 

LO will only ever go open source if ED go bankrupt.

 

This will be Bad. And unlikely.

[Yellonet]

GG, thanks for chimin' in. As Whisper mentioned, if documentation is the limiting factor, then it is quite understood that an F-16 is added to the simulation.

 

I do understand the F-16 is highly exported. The Mirage is as well! I may never get what I want. That is ok. Perhaps if LO goes open source, we all will get what we want.

I certainly hope that LockOn never goes open source, that would not be in the best interest of the simulation.

And personally I wouldn't mind the F-16 as it is a very versatile aircraft, and I've never had a sim that featured it.

[Yellonet]

India has the MiG-29K I think and Pakistan has F-16s, new map?

[Gazehound]

@ Manny...Mate....MiG29K....MiG29K!!!!

[D-Scythe]

GG, thanks for chimin' in. As Whisper mentioned, if documentation is the limiting factor, then it is quite understood that an F-16 is added to the simulation.

 

I do understand the F-16 is highly exported. The Mirage is as well! I may never get what I want. That is ok. Perhaps if LO goes open source, we all will get what we want.

 

Definitely a Mirage 2000 would've been nice. IMO, if there must be another western flyable, I would've preferred the Mirage 2000-5, Tornado F3/IDS or F/A-18C.

 

The F-16CJ and the MiG-29K are too "new" in my opinion - I prefer the current late 80s timeline to be kept.

 

Just for the record though, there has never been an F-15C sim or an A-10 sim. Those two are unique to LOMAC.

[192nd_Erdem]

ED is the only company that is experienced enough to simulate all those beautiful Russian birds,so I say I'm very happy with how they are going.Add that they have good sources from Russian Airforce too.

 

I think it's the wrong place,wrong game to wait for something "Western".ED is a Russian company where it's main consumer base is CIS and Russia.Also,there's many people from West who "love" to fly those well made Russian birds.

 

Maybe you guys should check out if "Figher Ops" will satisfy your needs.

[Pilotasso]

Definitely a Mirage 2000 would've been nice. IMO, if there must be another western flyable, I would've preferred the Mirage 2000-5, Tornado F3/IDS or F/A-18C.

 

The F-16CJ and the MiG-29K are too "new" in my opinion - I prefer the current late 80s timeline to be kept.

 

Just for the record though, there has never been an F-15C sim or an A-10 sim. Those two are unique to LOMAC.

 

dude why do you insist on whats has being explained already a 1000 times?

[NaCH]

I don`t care if it is a f16 mig29k ... the only thing I want is a A2G Radar.

 

Let start with this.

[mig29smt_fulcrum]

India has the MiG-29K I think and Pakistan has F-16s, new map?

 

LMAO that would be the worst war scenario ever specially if you want to fly the PAF F16's.Picture this :

Your in a F16A (early block which is only one which the Pakistanis have) without any BVR and old rusting AIM9's against highly upgraded Indian MiG29K's armed with R77's , R27's , R73's plus SU30's , Mirage 2000-5's with AWACS backing them up.No balance there buddy and no fun.Certainly I would never fly an F16 there :P

I do support the idea of an India - Pakistan map however since it has never been done before and nice change from the same old mid-east , Crimea or the what if cold - war scenarios.Wars involving lesser known airforces and countries (India , Israel etc) would really be awesome.

[britgliderpilot]

Just for the record though, there has never been an F-15C sim or an A-10 sim. Those two are unique to LOMAC.

 

I was about to slam you for the F15 sim bit, but, dammit, you're right . . . . Janes was an F15E.

 

 

What about A10 Cuba, though?