LOMAC is a good product. It just need someone to do some fine tuning. The game at it present state require you to micro manage all aspects of the battle.

Played FA/18, Falcon 4.0. etc..and I can say LOMAC has the best flight model of all these sims. The feeling of flying the jet that is..

Oh yeah..the graphics => no match.

All we need is a campaign..

Breadfan

Keep in mind that I haven't tried the newest patch. I"m still lookin for info on what was updated.

But as hard as I tried this sim just kept letting me down. So many key aspects were either missing or not close enough to keep my flying.

I'm more of an air to air type person. And the way people were spoofing missiles was making me sick. There were no proximity explosions. And 99% of the hosted games were with all external views enabled. Add to the fact that you could beat someone down to the ground and put them into a position where they had no "E" only to have them peg the throttles and escape just annoyed me so much I just haven't bothered to look at LOMAC again.

Hopefully the patch addressed some of these issues. I see some very very nice artwork. I"ll keep lookin for that patch info and maybe I'll be surprised but I don't have my hopes up.

Uh, patch. PATCH NOW. Then talk.

Until you patch to 1.02, we're not talking about the same game.

BTW, the patch info is ... in the patch. And it's a VERY long list.

I printed it out, it's over 60 pages.

This thread is full of people under the delusion that LOMAC can compare to something like Janes F-15 or even Falcon 4.0.

Have been flying it, and enjoying it. Taking my time learning it, but having fun as I go. Thanks for all the help.

As for you Operator, go troll somewhere else.

How does switchology=simulation fidelity? Now it is part of the puzzle and F4 and JF-15/18 does an amazing job, but also part and parcel is flight dynmaics and avionics fidelity, etc. LOMAC has a very complex radar model underneath that adds a lot to the sim aspect. I have yet to see a sim that models missile dynamics and missile burn as well as the Flanker/LOMAC series.

LOMAC does not need to have the same fidelity that FA18 or F4 has because it does not need it !

When flying the FA18 you are flying a fighter that has a far more complex radar - and you therefore need a clickable cockpit.

I don't miss it in LOMAC because I don't need it.

Falcon4 is a completely different sim - it is a mature game that has been around for some years and recently has been thoroughly updated - and cannot be compared to Lock-on.

for jets I'd like something in between, not too complex, not too arcade.

sounds like Lomac might fit then.

I like to play multiplayer - I'm not sure if Lomac is more of single player game or a multiplayer oriented game?

Far more complex radar? Heh, radars don't get a lot more complex than the air-to-air tailored AN/APG-70. While LOMAC does a good job in the physical simulation of how a radar works, it does a very poor job on simulating the APG-70.

Missing what from JF-18? There's a plethora of things missing - you're gonna need to be a lot more specific. For example, I think any air combat sim would need the radio comms, AI and some elements of the mission builder of F/A-18 at least.

But Eagle Dynamics is a small company, so if you're expecting them to turn out a game with all the bells and whistles like Janes Combat Sims did in the 90s you'll be sadly mistaken.

You need to do some research so that you know what in the hell you are talking about: The F-15C modeled in Lock On uses the APG-63 radar NOT the APG-70.

Again, you really don't know what you are saying as you know nothing about Eagle Dynamics.

Carl

In that case you guys did a horrible job of modeling the APG-70.............

Muahahaha, I friggin' love it when you come on here Stormin'. All these know it all pilot types that got all of their jet knowledge from flying on passenger airliners and from the movie Top Gun.

Remember folks, when putting on the "brakes" in an F14 you slam the throttle forward.

Stormin'

And remember to "shove it into overdrive..."

Stormin, I'm sorry if I offended you, but it's just how I see it. To the extent of my knowledge, the F-15 modelled in LOMAC is either MSIP II or hybrid MSIP F-15C, but the bottomline is, even if it is the AN/APG-63, or -70, it doesn't model it with the fidelity that both radars deserve. Janes F-15 did a good job modelling an Eagle radar...even you have to sorta admit that the two BVR radar modes in LOMAC for the F-15C, RWS and TWS, doesn't do it justice. There's at least 5 main search modes, RWS, RGH, VCTR, VS and TWS on both the APG-63 and -70, AFAIK, as well as their associated sub-modes.

Oh, and btw, it should be the AN/APG-70. MSIP F-15C Eagles are the only Charlies with the MPCD, so far as I know, and since the MPCD is in the bottomleft of the cockpit Eagle pit in LOMAC, I think it was reasonable to assume that the APG-70 was modelled in LOMAC. The APG-70, like the MPCD, are features of the MSIP upgrade.

Wow, this coming from the guy who told me, and a lot of other people, that ED just doesn't have the resources to model things like more radio comms and accurate naval combat when I inquired about them?

Honestly, you told me everything I said. I'm not looking for a fight here, but face it, in some aspects, such as AI and avionics modelling, LOMAC cannot compare to JF-15 or F4. Yes, LOMAC has its selling points, but there's also some areas that could use improvement. For example, it would be ridiculous to compare the graphics of LOMAC to JF-15, just as it is ridiculous to compare the avionics modelling of the two games.

Wow, where did that come from? I was merely giving my opinion on this piece of software that I own, not teaching people how to fly. If you don't agree, or choose to pretend that LOMAC is perfect, than that is fine with me. I'd rather continue to try to make LOMAC as good as it can be, even if it means provoking the wrath of Stormin'

The design goal of the F-15C radar system was NEVER to go to the extent of JF-15. The original design was based on a 12 month dev cycle and doing multiple aircraft, not just the Eagle. As such, the F-15C radar was a somewhat stream-lined version of the APG-63/70 that gave a good operator's feel of what's it's like to use the system and its strengths and weaknesses. Given that it ended up taking two additional years to even get this streamlined version in the game (albeit still having a few bugs at release), I believe the right choice was taken.

Can't please everyone; but given the time, design objective, personnel and resources, I think Eagle did a very good job.

As to the original question of it being arcade: sure, if you play it in easy radar mode with all the other assists on. However, without the assists, I believe the product gives a good overall reprentation of modern air combat.

-Matt

Nice to see you posting here Wags. I spend alot of time w/LOMAC and appreciate all that you gave us. And you saved me the hassle of using a noCD "patch".

I'm not "offended". I just don't like seeing people say things online that are totally incorrect.

As Wags has already stated, Lock On models a modified version of the APG-63. I totally disagree with your assessment of the RWS and TWS, particularly after the V1.02 patch. Several sub-modes were purposely left out.

Thanks, but I know the full designation and I also know what "AN" stands for.

Lock On's F-15C does not have a Multi-Purpose Color Display in the bottom-left of the cockpit because we did not model it. There were phases in the MSIP upgrade program. MPCD and other upgrades, including data links, were not until later. We did not model those on purpose.

You are, again, mistaken. I have stated that we did not fully model naval operations because Lock On was an air combat game. I know all about naval games having worked on many. Sure, we had limited resouces (BUDGET, MONEY, MOOLAH) but Eagle Dyanmics is very capable of creating a simulation product equal or greater to anything that was done by EA/Janes given the money and time. If you compare project budgets between what a Janes' title had and what LOMAC had then you have your answer. I have no doubt that the next sim project from Eagle will be outstanding.

I don't recall extensive modeling of naval operations in either Falcon nor in Janes' F-15, by the way.

You make the common mistake in assuming that Lock On was trying to be either a Falcon or a Janes' F-15. It was not.

This exchange was hardly a display of my "wrath". You're making this more than it really is. Just because I disagree with you and point out where you are incorrect doesn't mean I am "offended" or that you have conjured up my "wrath".

Carl

I think the problem Stormin is when people talk with you, this is the image in their head

Hey, I didn't have anyone standing at attention nor did anyone drop and do push-ups.