Matt or Crash,
Could we get an "official overview" post of what the sim contains/models?
A list of "what's cool" would help as well.

Thanks in advance!

Contains:
everything

Models:
most everything.

Does NOT contain:
elves

Does NOT model:
kitchen sinks.

"LO:MAC, if it's not in there, YOU DON'T NEED IT so just SHUT UP."

The Jedi Master

I plan on doing some interviews in the near future, like here at SimHQ. I'll be going over the basic feature set then.

------------------
Matt Wagner
Producer
SSI/Ubi Soft

Don't do one for CombatSim - I won't see it.

It really looks good.

F2.5 is also a keeper. The flight models seems crisper than F2 out of the box. I really like the basic Su-27. Thank you SO much for giving us a2g weps again! Though I DO wish Kh-25MP's or Kh-31p's were available.

One thing that I'd REALLY like to see in Lock On is user configurable loadouts. That's GOT to be a hot request. It's the one thing in Flanker I've always wished was present.

Miao, Cat

There has really not been much said about the sim. SSI has been releasing screen shots for some time under the old "Flanker Attack" name. Nothing has been said about the campaign nor the background stories involved. All that is know is it will feature 4 jets, all with different, realistic flight models. The A-10 and Frogfoot will feature lots of mud moving while the AA combat is covered with the F15C and the SU-27. There will moving ground units and possible add-ons if the sales warrant it.

I am really excited about this sim because Carl and Matt recognize where Flanker went wrong, (corrected alot in 2.5) and they do not plan to make the same mistakes. I loved Janes F18 so I am eager to see what Matt can do here.

Stay tune to the Flanker 2 forum at http://www.flanker2.com for more info. Although that site is coming down and a new LOMAC site will go up soon.

Stephen

Four? I thought we had:
Su-25
Su-27
Su-33
Su-39
MiG-29K
A-10
F-15C
The Jedi Master

...and
MiG-29C

Best Regards,
Keener

I think it is just four. The others are most certainly in the sim, but probably not flyable. I know that the SU-33 is a navalized version of the SU-27 and naval operations might be planned for add-ons if LOMAC sells well. (God willing) I could be completely wrong, but I really don't that many are flyable.

Stephen

Stephen, check out: http://www.flanker2.com/lock-on.html .

The flyable planes are listed as:
F-15C Eagle
A-10 Warthog
Su-27 Flanker
MiG-29[C?] Fulcrum
MiG-29K Fulcrum
Su-25 Frogfoot
Su-33 Flanker
Su-39 Frogfoot

Even if you count the Su-27/33, Mig-29C/K, and Su-25/39 as the same aircraft you still have 5 flyables.

Spiff is correct about the flyable aircraft in Lock On. However, Lock On will focus on the land-based aircraft (Su-27, MiG-29, Su-25, F-15C, and A-10) and land-based operations. The navalized aircraft (Su-33, Su-39, and MiG-29K) will only be available via the mission editor.

------------------
Matt Wagner
Producer
SSI/Ubi Soft

Oh, ok, so the campaign won't have a naval side to it?

And I'd just like to point out to everyone that there is no MiG-29C, it's the MiG-29 Fulcrum-C as reported by NATO. It has the humped spine which the Fulcrum-A did not.
The Russians made no distinction between the two, however. There are more differences in F-16 Blocks. That's why the USAF operates like variants in a squadron (all Block 40s for example) but Frontal Aviation would have Fulcrum-As and Fulcrum-Cs in the same unit.
The Jedi Master

[This message has been edited by jedimaster (edited 04-12-2001).]

I guess I was so excited about the F15C and the A10 that I blocked out most of the other jets.

Stephen

[This message has been edited by Overkill (edited 04-12-2001).]

Excellent point jedi. One of my pet peeves is seeing the term MiG-29C.



------------------
Matt Wagner
Producer
SSI/Ubi Soft

Yeah, it's a nitpick, but why be inaccurate when it's easier to be vague?
Just saying "MiG-29s" is correct and easier than both "MiG-29C and MiG-29K" and it's more accurate.
I'll talk about F-4's, but I'll leave off the B/D/J/S whatever since I don't remember which ones were USAF and which were USN or USMC. Aside from the G, that's easy.
The Jedi Master

Sorry Mat, I don´t quite follow, yuo won´t ave navaliced versions in the campaign, but this planes will be flyable trhoug Mision editor rigth?

So If I take the time to build me a mission wiht the Kuschetnof I will be able to take off an land on it.

If not, hey no problem, LOMAC is quite impresive as it is, and I still have Flanker, . Besides I gess I will be sticking to moving mud with LOMAC, ahhh... I love opening cans, jeje (can=M1s-T80´s) jeje. And I will have the rigth tools for it, A-10 and SU-25....

By the way any news on the theater...
ok,ok, I´ll wait till you do the interviews .

Sorry

You are correct Baco.



------------------
Matt Wagner
Producer
SSI/Ubi Soft

A lot of these are not all that different from each other and so are not going to be as much of a real new-treat as much as 'another slow/fast/CAS/Air Dominance' revision of the other sides compareable airframe or indeed their own.

The Su-25 in particular will be something of a disappointment with the Su-39 present, especially if the latter is not the 'single seat UTG', naval only, version but actually a production 25TM (landbase) model.

The Su-25 has little more than a stabilized laser ranger and (occasionally) addon HTS type pod for cueing old KH-58 ARM.

The 39 gives you teleoptic fast-scan Shkval lockon for the Vikhr and the option of two radars (Kopyo and Kinzhal/Arbalets) plus two visionics pods (Khod and Merkuri) for more ordinary (SALH and Radar) smart/standoff weapon cue.

Which in turn gives you most of the Russian ASM/AShM options and even potentially radar AAM while the older Frogfoot is little more than a dumb bomber and rocket ship.

Not least, the 39 comes with a comprehensive EW suite to include Omul outer pylon pods and the Sukhogroz IRCM container out back.

The Hunchback is probably a pig to fly compared to the sleeker original model but I bet it will still run high speed rings around the A-10 and there is only so much that 'agility' can bring you in the original Rook before you start to take hits in a modern environment anyway.

Given a choice, I would have FAR preferred an even more radically 'different' Su-24/34 or even one or more of the new LFI concepts (Su-54).

Heck I would have even taken an L-39/159 'trainer' for use as light strike/battlefield superiority/FAC/Escort. Either for or against helos as well as A-10's etc.

The F-15 is kewl and I am -very- grateful that it is at last an Albino but I think most people will quickly become bored with it's all-A/A mission motif.

And since we're no longer fighting a 1970/80's scenario with SARH dominant tactics leading to narrow bore IR merge combat, I have to wonder whether anyone will appreciate the finer points of speed up, clean up, ramp up, to a BVR AMRAAM vs. Adder A-Pol decision against Russki-27's which should easily beat it in the visual fight.

I still wish they had included some at least /marginally/ naval related and particularly 'multirole' combatant airframes.

The F4 Viper is a joke for systems commonality between B.40 and .50 models and, IMO, looks.

The the F-18 hasn't seen a really good attempt at a C/D systems mimic since HK if not Falcon 3 (for christs sake) and if you went with the F-14D, you could have flown both Fleet Defender type missions with saturation bomber cruise attacks AND divierse missions from Strike/Road Recce to LGB pinpoint attack and even SEAD/TALD missions (probably as part of a base CAP A/A one).

LOMAC is clearly a life preserver for the Flanker series, a last chance to branch out into a broader sales pool without giving away -all- of the Russian system orientation.

But in addition to the basic 'campaign' and mission management (loadout!) problems, if they don't include a few multirole platforms offset against perhaps a few specialist interdictors (East vs. West totally -dissimilar- tactics and airframes instead of 'opposites of the same coin') they will be just as badly stuck with a game that no one platform can be really useful in all circumstances nor fast enough to evade being killed by other specialist airframes which the player simply isn't flying.

That's what makes the Swing-role systems reasonably popular. Both for real and in-sim. If you stumble on something you can't fight, you can run away. If you stumble on something you can fight, you usually have the sensor-investment to find it and kill it, quickly.


KP

I'll admit I'd also prefer an Su-32/34 to the Frogfoot, as well as perhaps a real Su-30(MK/MKI/MKK) but this is what we've got!

The Jedi Master