LOMAC 1.1 = Tornado 2 ?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

Ok, don't get over-excited. I know I'm pushing the limits of credibility
here, but bear with me a little.

First the disclaimer. Even after all these bl**dy years Tornado's
gameplay engine has more to offer (me) than LOMAC's. This week I've
spent about 20 hours trying to design some interesting missions for a
LOMAC campaign with a difference, but the severe limitations of the AI
and the limited design tools have me as frustrated as ever. For me LOMAC
remains a collection of *great* ingredients without a decent plate to
serve them on.

Maybe I should get into A2A combat, then I'd be too busy measuring
AMRAAM effectiveness to worry about anything happening on the ground.

Where was I? Oh, the Tornado thing.

Tornado: slow-ish, not very manoeuvrable, heavily armed, ground-hugging
radar autopilot mode, SEAD capability, LGB capability, ability to sit in
cockpit pretending to be Biggles.

Su-25T: see above, only without the Biggles bit. But you do get to
listen to nagging Nadia instead, which is always a bonus. Be stern with
me Mistress! I'm sorry I broke your plane, I've been a very, *very* bad boy!

Ok, the Tornado's appeal is broadened by fun with the variable wing and
extra speed options and AI assistance that doesn't get scared off by the
first ping on its RWR, but the 25-T has the most amazing flight
modelling in a military sim ever (IMO). Drop a heavy missile and you
feel the plane react immediately until you drop another to balance
things up (or mess about with trimming or the autopilot, but that's for
girls ;-). And landing is as much fun as it ever was in Tornado.
Crawling back to base with a damaged aircraft for a tense landing does
add something to a mission.

With the 25-T you also get "combat steering mode" for the autopilot,
which is very useful indeed. Lock onto a point somewhere roughly in the
right area for your target (with the onboard targeting system rather
than visual padlock), engage the autopilot, and it steers towards the
selected point, freeing you to refine your targeting point for a
missile... or just drive around the landscape, if you're a bit on the
sad side.

Of course there is another problem with LOMAC 1.1... ED still haven't
worked out how to sell it to you. I think this is what they call
"shooting yourself in the foot". Some things never change

Andrew McP

 

[jp]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

"Andrew MacPherson" <andrew.mcp@DELETETHISdsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:426889b1$0$289$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
>
> Ok, don't get over-excited. I know I'm pushing the limits of credibility
> here, but bear with me a little.
>
> First the disclaimer. Even after all these bl**dy years Tornado's
> gameplay engine has more to offer (me) than LOMAC's. This week I've
> spent about 20 hours trying to design some interesting missions for a
> LOMAC campaign with a difference, but the severe limitations of the AI
> and the limited design tools have me as frustrated as ever. For me LOMAC
> remains a collection of *great* ingredients without a decent plate to
> serve them on.
>
> Maybe I should get into A2A combat, then I'd be too busy measuring
> AMRAAM effectiveness to worry about anything happening on the ground.
>
> Where was I? Oh, the Tornado thing.
>
> Tornado: slow-ish, not very manoeuvrable, heavily armed, ground-hugging
> radar autopilot mode, SEAD capability, LGB capability, ability to sit in
> cockpit pretending to be Biggles.
>
> Su-25T: see above, only without the Biggles bit. But you do get to
> listen to nagging Nadia instead, which is always a bonus. Be stern with
> me Mistress! I'm sorry I broke your plane, I've been a very, *very* bad
boy!
>
> Ok, the Tornado's appeal is broadened by fun with the variable wing and
> extra speed options and AI assistance that doesn't get scared off by the
> first ping on its RWR, but the 25-T has the most amazing flight
> modelling in a military sim ever (IMO). Drop a heavy missile and you
> feel the plane react immediately until you drop another to balance
> things up (or mess about with trimming or the autopilot, but that's for
> girls ;-). And landing is as much fun as it ever was in Tornado.
> Crawling back to base with a damaged aircraft for a tense landing does
> add something to a mission.
>
> With the 25-T you also get "combat steering mode" for the autopilot,
> which is very useful indeed. Lock onto a point somewhere roughly in the
> right area for your target (with the onboard targeting system rather
> than visual padlock), engage the autopilot, and it steers towards the
> selected point, freeing you to refine your targeting point for a
> missile... or just drive around the landscape, if you're a bit on the
> sad side.
>
> Of course there is another problem with LOMAC 1.1... ED still haven't
> worked out how to sell it to you. I think this is what they call
> "shooting yourself in the foot". Some things never change
>
> Andrew McP


Agreed. It's to bad really; such potential for a classic series,
consistently wasted on releasing pretty much the same thing, with just
different graphics. Personally, I've given up on ED et al, after hearing
for the third time, "Sorry, I know we promised a dynamic campaign in this
release, but we promise it'll be in the next".

Hmmm.....still have Tornado around here somewhere.........

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

I'd rather have it as something along the lines of

LOMAC 1.1 = Flanker 3.1 (Su-25T, vastly improved physics)
LOMAC 1.2 = Flanker 3.11 for workgroups (Ka-52, mission editor
improvements, bug fixes)
LOMAC 1.3 = DI's frontline fighters II (Apache, Hind, third-party
dynamic campaign engine)
LOMAC 1.4 = Tornado 1.9 (including swept wing, Loft bombing, ALARMS)
LOMAC 1.5 = TORNADO II (bug fixes and JP-233's)

What ? Wishful thinking, me ?
OK, I admit I failed to complete the Dr. McP's 12-step program.

Andrew MacPherson wrote:
> Su-25T: see above, only without the Biggles bit. But you do get to
> listen to nagging Nadia instead, which is always a bonus. Be stern with
> me Mistress! I'm sorry I broke your plane, I've been a very, *very* bad
> boy!

Mmmh. Makes you wonder how the voice warning system sounds like in a
French Mirage.

> Of course there is another problem with LOMAC 1.1... ED still haven't
> worked out how to sell it to you. I think this is what they call
> "shooting yourself in the foot".

Yup. I had the great displeasure of encountering a StarForce issue
(didn't like one of my drives, apparently), but I suppose I should
consider myself as lucky because at least I got FC before the Paypal
debacle.

Maybe ED could learn something from the good people at
www.condorsoaring.com : no-nonsense license system and an e-commerce
solution that works. BTW, Condor is also a great product with excellent
physics modelling that you can check against the real thing at the local
airclub... for about the same cost as the sim.

Regards,
Mr. Sylvestre

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

In article <d4adf4$k7g$1@ikaria.belnet.be>, MrSylvestre@worldcompany.com
(Mr. Sylvestre) wrote:

> What ? Wishful thinking, me ?

Wash your mouth out! We'll have no wishful thinking in my threads, thanks.

> Makes you wonder how the voice warning system sounds
> like in a French Mirage.

"Pardonez mois, mais vous avez oublie votre champagne et truffles pour
votre petit dejeuner."

"Zut alors, les fuselage est dirty! C'est un eyesore! Retreatez-vous
maintenant!"

"Les engines est fooked! Un deux-chevaux avec une wheel avais plus
puissance!"

We'll never know for sure I guess. It'd never sell to the F/A-18 fans
who seem to pour out of the woodwork every time anyone mentions a patch
or new version. I'd sell my soul just for a major update to the AI so we
create some more involving missions. I'd even put it as a higher
priority than the AFM for the Flanker, it's that important. And I want
that Flanker AFM very much indeed <dribble>.

> Condor is also a great product with excellent physics modelling

It does look very good, and I was quite inspired by gliders for a while
after I saw an aerobatic routine by a pair at an airshow a few years
ago... takes some guts to do that without an engine! But overall the
last thing I need right now is another sim. I'm too busy trying to make
a LOMAC AI transport aircraft land without going for a ten km detour
cross-country. I need the timing to be right or my trick for making the
next stage of the campaign depend upon it won't work.

As I sit here there are people out there in the world trying to discover
a cure for cancer, writing great works of fiction, caring for the sick,
and pushing back the boundaries of knowledge & technology. If only they
knew what real work was!

Andrew McP

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

>On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 09:08:38 -0500, "JP" <jp@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Agreed. It's to bad really; such potential for a classic series,
>consistently wasted on releasing pretty much the same thing, with just
>different graphics. Personally, I've given up on ED et al, after hearing
>for the third time, "Sorry, I know we promised a dynamic campaign in this
>release, but we promise it'll be in the next".
>

If they did I would buy everything they made, but I just can't get
into it with the current system of scripted play.

Icer

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

>
> Agreed. It's to bad really; such potential for a classic series,
> consistently wasted on releasing pretty much the same thing, with just
> different graphics. Personally, I've given up on ED et al, after hearing
> for the third time, "Sorry, I know we promised a dynamic campaign in this
> release, but we promise it'll be in the next".
>
> Hmmm.....still have Tornado around here somewhere.........
>
Dear All

I must confess, I still play Tornado on and off!

To me the best Tornado can be currently is if used with the
various brilliant patches and addons, mostly written by
Heinz-Bernd Eggenstein and his band of merry and equally
brilliant men. These are found at (as you already know):
http://members.aol.com/hbeggenst/tornado.html
My favorite are (is) the Time Compression TSR program.
Also the Night Vision Goggles and Snow mods.

What would be really nice is if there were a way to create a
mission editor like Steel Beasts' or SU-27 Flanker's editor.
The mission editor (hypothetical one) would allow one to
1) Design the terrain (heights, lows, contours, etc)
2) Place terrain objects (natural and man-made)
3) Place SAM sites and AAA
4) Place airfields
5) Place targets
etc.
Drool!

Now that would really extend the playability of the game.
To tell you frankly, when I first played Tornado a few years
ago, I hated the graphics because they looked so dated. And
I couldn't understand why it was so highly rated. But once I
got into the mission planner and re-read the 300+ page manual,
and got into the gameplay with multiple deliveries of ordinances,
and multiple autopilot modes, the game simply rocked!
After using Heinz-Bernd Eggenstein's mods, it rocks even more.

I've downloaded hexedit and tried to poke around with hexediting
some of the Tornado mission data files, but since I failed
Assembly Language in college back in 1992, I can't make head-or-
tail out of what's on the hexedit screen.

I've surfed around a bit and here's an incomplete
list of games that have been patched/modded and which were/are modified.

Falcon 4.0
Rowan's BOB (of course the source code is available for this one)
Mig alley
EECH
Dynamix Red Baron (the original one!)
Sierra's Red Baron 3D
Falcon 3.0 (numerous patches/addons can be found at
www.filelibrary.com)
Jane's F/A-18 Superhornet (not DI's one)
EAW (like how!)
SDOE (also like how!)
USAF

Now here's my point:
If an antiquated VGA game like Dynamix's original Red Baron can be
modded and enhanced, why not more work/mods on Tornado?
It's also funny how there are so many mods and addons for Falcon 3.0
(see www.filelibrary.com) as compared to Tornado - both games were
of the same era.

Can't DI make the source code pulic domain, so that the super-modders
out there can ply throught the code?

Okay, okay, since wishful thinking is not allowed in this thread,
;-) then here's a few "practical" suggestions:

What about contacting the original development team who created Tornado
and see if there may be something in the offing? There names are listed
at the back of the Tornado manual.

Can Heinz spare a time-slice of his day to poke around the code again
and produce another brilliant mod?

I'd be willing to pay shareware money, or just plain money for
a mission editor for Tornado.

Frankie Kam
TornadoMan's Hanger
http://www.stamford.edu.my/socsscm/tree/tornado.html
"I'll hit the brakes, and he'll fly right by"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

> I must confess, I still play Tornado on and off!

I can only get the instant action mission to work, so I'm a little
limited. But I do regularly start it up and check I can still remember
some of the right keys. It's surprising how quickly it all comes back
once you're flying.

> If an antiquated VGA game like Dynamix's original Red Baron
> can be modded and enhanced, why not more work/mods on Tornado

I've suggested before here that it really ought to be possible to
persuade Tornado to run in a window which can be anti-aliased, to at
least smooth out the low-res jaggies. That would help a lot, because
Tornado was never about pretty graphics, it was about detailed weapons
systems and the tension involved in using them.

I think it's a bit much to expect anything else to be done with the code
without a serious amount of talent and perseverance. As for the source
code, I don't even know if DI exist any more, let alone whether they'd
be happy to give away their old code... if they can still find it

> There names are listed at the back of the Tornado manual.

Some of those people went on to form Razorworks (EECH etc), and I think
that's one reason why EECH was so promising and why they released the
EECH source code. They're flight sim enthusiasts. Though sadly they've
gone on to more lucrative, console-based racing games. If Tornado2 was
ever going to happen it would have been through them, via evolution of
the EECH engine. DI lost the plot somewhere after Hind.

Who knows, maybe if one of us wins the lottery we can pay them to
develop another flight sim? ;-)

In the mean time, LOMAC 1.1 does have some hardcore thrills to offer the
A2G enthusiast. Just remember you have to hold a shotgun to the AI's
head in order to persuade it not to run away from radar threats, unlike
our brave (but rather foolish!) Tornado pilots.

Andrew McP

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

"Andrew MacPherson" <andrew.mcp@DELETETHISdsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:4268cda2$0$297$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
> In article <d4adf4$k7g$1@ikaria.belnet.be>, MrSylvestre@worldcompany.com
> (Mr. Sylvestre) wrote:
>
> > What ? Wishful thinking, me ?
>
> Wash your mouth out! We'll have no wishful thinking in my threads, thanks.
>
> > Makes you wonder how the voice warning system sounds
> > like in a French Mirage.
>
> "Pardonez mois, mais vous avez oublie votre champagne et truffles pour
> votre petit dejeuner."
>
> "Zut alors, les fuselage est dirty! C'est un eyesore! Retreatez-vous
> maintenant!"
>
> "Les engines est fooked! Un deux-chevaux avec une wheel avais plus
> puissance!"
>
> We'll never know for sure I guess. It'd never sell to the F/A-18 fans who
> seem to pour out of the woodwork every time anyone mentions a patch or new
> version. I'd sell my soul just for a major update to the AI so we create
> some more involving missions. I'd even put it as a higher priority than
> the AFM for the Flanker, it's that important. And I want that Flanker AFM
> very much indeed <dribble>.
>
> > Condor is also a great product with excellent physics modelling
>
> It does look very good, and I was quite inspired by gliders for a while
> after I saw an aerobatic routine by a pair at an airshow a few years
> ago... takes some guts to do that without an engine! But overall the last
> thing I need right now is another sim. I'm too busy trying to make a LOMAC
> AI transport aircraft land without going for a ten km detour
> cross-country. I need the timing to be right or my trick for making the
> next stage of the campaign depend upon it won't work.
>
> As I sit here there are people out there in the world trying to discover a
> cure for cancer, writing great works of fiction, caring for the sick, and
> pushing back the boundaries of knowledge & technology. If only they knew
> what real work was!
>
> Andrew McP


LMAO! Love your French impersonation. You are quite the artiste and think
you may have a little French in you! Oh la la! As long as those French
phrases are accompanied by a Moulin Rouge girl shaking her boobies in your
face I'd buy it.

At least you are keeping the flight sim alive and of interest. I have yet to
break out my LO-MAC again. I've been semi-converted to the "other" side and
been playing FPS and RTS games. However, as soon as I set up my flight gear,
I end up playing that for months on end.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

In article <QZednZEiT5Yx0fffRVn-ow@comcast.com>,
magma@killspam.comcast.net (HockeyTownUSA) wrote:

> At least you are keeping the flight sim alive and of interest.

I reserve the right to pursue lost causes to the bitter end

> I've been semi-converted to the "other" side and
> been playing FPS and RTS games

The D3 add-on is waiting on my HD to be played, and I've an itch to buy
Cossacks2 and Rise of Nations (whose demo keeps luring me in when fighting
LOMAC AI doesn't appeal).

Andrew McP