PDA

View Full Version : Good modern aircombat games?



Noxx0s
05-09-2010, 09:34 PM
So I was flying in a jet map on zekevswildcat server and having a good time blasting migs out of the sky in my sabre, and was looking for more of it...

What are some good modern aircombat games? I'd prefer that nice period before all the BVR missile systems came out, but if it's a great quality sim I'm up for anything.

I've heard a lot of good things about DCS Blackshark. How does it compare to IL-2? Seems like flying a helo would be a bit... odd I mean you can't pull any crazy maneuvers right? You're just a flying gun platform.

Sillius_Sodus
05-09-2010, 09:41 PM
Hello,

Probably your best best bet at this time wold be the Strike Fighters series by Third Wire. The basic game is, well, pretty basic, but there is some good user-made and third-party content available.

nvrsummer2
05-09-2010, 10:09 PM
I never really played it but I think Lock on: Modern air combat was supposed to be decent. I heard buggy though but maybe now theres some content out for it

WTE_Galway
05-09-2010, 10:11 PM
Originally posted by IcyScythe:
Seems like flying a helo would be a bit... odd I mean you can't pull any crazy maneuvers right?

hmm .. you think so ..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQ2F_6OcTBg

Jambock_Dolfo
05-09-2010, 10:16 PM
IMO F4-Falcon is still the king.

For straight out-of-the-box fun, go with F4 Allied Force. If you want a better overall experience, get a copy of original F4 Falcon and install Open Falcon on top. Not as easy or stable as Allied Force, but much much more fun.

Graphics are way older than those on DCS:BS or LOMAC, but it is a better simulation.


-dolfo

BillSwagger
05-09-2010, 10:20 PM
does anyone know more about strike fighters?

Does it have a decent multiplayer platform or is it primarily for offline players?

I heard of Lock On, that's suppose to be pretty good, and i think they also have a good multiplayer scene.


Bill

Jambock_Dolfo
05-09-2010, 10:23 PM
I tried Strike Fighters. Thought it was too simplified. Never got it to work online. Didn't try too hard, though.


-dolfo

Frankthetank36
05-09-2010, 10:25 PM
Originally posted by nvrsummer2:
I never really played it but I think Lock on: Modern air combat was supposed to be decent. I heard buggy though but maybe now theres some content out for it

Has anyone here tried Flaming Cliffs (2)? I've stayed away from Lock On since I have a pretty low end computer (2GHZ processor and 2GB of ram) and I've heard it is a total graphics pig. Do the new versions do anything about this? Also, has anyone tried running Blackshark with a low end system? Mine meets the minimum requirements (barely) so I am wondering if the performance and graphics on my machine would be closer to IL2's (great as long as it isn't overcast) or FSX's (horrible no matter what).

Oh, and Falcon 4.0 is supposed to run well on weaker computers, but the graphics aren't up to par with those of the other titles I mentioned. MiG alley was a Korean war sim that was (from the reviews I read, never played it) amazing but it is really, really old.

AndyJWest
05-09-2010, 10:43 PM
The original Lock On just about runs on the ancient heap I'm currently using, with only 1 GB RAM, I've not tried Flaming Cliffs. I'd probably fly it more, but I find BVR air combat boring. The A-10 is fun though - a Sturmovik on steroids, complete with anti-tank raspberry-blower - phthhhhp-boom! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Frankthetank36
05-09-2010, 10:45 PM
Does the performance compare to that of IL-2? For some reason when I play FSX, I find that the graphics AND framerate are BOTH worse than those in IL-2! For the requirements for the processor for Lock On Gold, it says it needs "Pentium III 800/AMD Athlon 600 or better" but I have no idea what that means since it doesn't say anything about gigahertz (I find that that is the case with a lot of newer titles).

WTE_Galway
05-09-2010, 10:52 PM
Originally posted by Frankthetank36:
"Pentium III 800/AMD Athlon 600 or better" but I have no idea what that means since it doesn't say anything about gigahertz (I find that that is the case with a lot of newer titles).

800 = 800 Mhz = 0.8 Ghz

600 = 600 Mhz = 0.6 Ghz


FSX is way more demanding than IL2. Partly because the FSX engine is 8 years newer.

Ghz is not mentioned for many titles because its a meaningless statistic only useful for selling computers. For example a 2.2 Ghz i7 would be vastly faster than a 3Ghz p4.

AndyJWest
05-09-2010, 11:20 PM
FSX is way more demanding than IL2. Partly because the FSX engine is 8 years newer.

Yes, 'partly'. And possibly partly also because the FSX engine isn't really 'new' so much as a typical Microsoft 'upgrade' which exploits the latest hardware, but only at the expense of rendering previous hardware obsolete. If you haven't got an up-to-date PC, FS9 works better. Come to think of it, if you haven't got an up-to-date PC, Windows XP works better too...

doogerie
05-10-2010, 01:51 AM
ok so I have lockon and DSC these sims are very good but also extremly hard to get to grips with if you have a lode of free time go get lock on or dsc both are good other wise i think you would be better of woth strike fighter or if you can find it (this is very old) Mig Ally.

TinyTim
05-10-2010, 02:07 AM
I fly Lock On here and there and find ground attack the most entertaining. Su-25 and A-10 are fantastic ground attack platforms. If your side has air dominance, and if you even have some dedicated SEAD flights, they can wreck total havoc upon the enemy on the ground. Kinda like a Stuka or IL-2.

Never tried anything else, so I can't comment.

Erkki_M
05-10-2010, 02:08 AM
I agree with Jambock Dolfo - its the Falcon 4.

Out-of-box, Falcon 4 Allied Force, but if you want to download a few extra gigabytes of mods, get the FreeFalcon5, standalone game built on the original falcon 4. LOMAC does flight physics slightly better(imho), has better graphics(but not that much!) and damage physics, but Falcon models the whole war in air, ground, supply and factory, and has far more detailed avionics, and weapons, radars and DLINK actually work as they should. Campaigns can be played in multiplayer as well. Just starting up the F-16 takes roughly a hundred clicks and min 14 minutes before you can start taxing - if you dont want to warm up and and calibrate the intertial navigation system, warming up IR sensors of the Mavericks is half an hour...

general_kalle
05-10-2010, 02:53 AM
Lock on flaming cliffs is pretty cool with the exception of the cheating AI (Similar way as it does in IL2... no blackout, total awareness all the time supirior aviaonics etc.) still its pretty cool, dont have FC2 yet

Frankthetank36
05-10-2010, 09:02 AM
So how 'bout Blackshark, will it run at least as well as IL-2 for a low-ish end computer or does it need a computer closer to the likes of one required for FSX? Also what is the better entry-level jet sim, Falcon 4.0 or Lock On? It sounds like F4.0AF is about as realistic as it gets but Lock On is still much, much more complex than IL-2 or MFS. I hope these games give you checklists like you get with MFS.

Sillius_Sodus
05-10-2010, 11:43 AM
Hi,

The OP was asking about pre-BVR, and Strike Fighters has a lot of that. Straight out of the box it's pretty bare but it was designed to be open source. I haven't played it in a long time but back when I did there was a good Korean campaign as well as a mid-fifties-ish NATO vs. Warsaw Pact campaign.

There have been some good third-party add-ons such as Wings over Vietnam, Yankee Air Pirates, and a few others.

I found the game modelled ground combat better than IL2, which was nice during mud moving missions. The aircraft models are also quite lovely.

There is a lot of information on it over at www.simhq.com (http://www.simhq.com)

p-11.cAce
05-10-2010, 01:00 PM
For modern air combat I think LOMAC: Flaming Cliffs is the best. The patches have it stable and the FMB is similar to the one in IL2. Falcon 4 AF is ok, but the graphics and overall feel of the software is really dated. Blackshark is amazing but you really need a pretty good computer to run it well. It's also a "study sim" with just the Ka-50 flyable so you are tying yourself to that aircraft alone.

stalkervision
05-10-2010, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by Sillius_Sodus:
Hi,

The OP was asking about pre-BVR, and Strike Fighters has a lot of that. Straight out of the box it's pretty bare but it was designed to be open source. I haven't played it in a long time but back when I did there was a good Korean campaign as well as a mid-fifties-ish NATO vs. Warsaw Pact campaign.

There have been some good third-party add-ons such as Wings over Vietnam, Yankee Air Pirates, and a few others.

I found the game modelled ground combat better than IL2, which was nice during mud moving missions. The aircraft models are also quite lovely.

There is a lot of information on it over at www.simhq.com (http://www.simhq.com)

Strike fighters is the choice here. All you say is true.

Skunk_438RCAF
05-10-2010, 03:51 PM
These are my thoughts on the whole thing so take them as you will.

If someone is only just migrating from Il2 to an advanced jet sim, they're better off with the likes of the Strike Fighters series. Its jet combat, but still not too advanced. When you play the Vietnam missions, aircraft still have pippers and rudimentary aiming devices.

If one migrates from Il2 to Falcon 4.0, they might find themselves to be overwhelmed. To go from a simple point-and-shoot sim to one where you have to manage aircraft, weapons, navigation and radar systems is like graduating from 1st grade math to university level calculus.

I guess it all depends on what you're after. If you want to have a bit of fun, go with the simpler sims, but if you're thing is absolute realism go for Falcon.

Romanator21
05-10-2010, 11:36 PM
There's always Shockwings :P

http://www.fastgames.com/shockwings.html

mortoma
05-11-2010, 09:39 PM
He's talking about before BVR and such but you guys keep bringing up BVR missle type games. I don't know of any personaly. Really, a Korean war sim is the only type of sim that would have early jets without modern BVR type of stuff. Mig Alley was the last dedicated pre-missile jet game that I can remember. Wings Over Vietnam/Yankee Air Pirates would be kind of a mix of guns and missiles and I hear it's supposed to be pretty good. I haven't tried it though.

TheGrunch
05-12-2010, 02:35 AM
Welll, I guess Vietnam games count since pilots were often required to visually identify targets, and the AIM-7E was not particularly reliable or effective.

BillSwagger
05-12-2010, 02:56 AM
Originally posted by Skunk_438RCAF:
If one migrates from Il2 to Falcon 4.0, they might find themselves to be overwhelmed.

How would i ever figure it out? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif With all the hoops in Il2, i would think you'd have no problems adjusting to a later sim. I have seen some stuff on falcon 4, and a lot of it looks pretty exciting. It comes with a 750 page manual if that gives you any clue to how much more complex of a sim it is. I wouldn't discourage anyone from looking into it, especially coming from Il2.
I find that even the more complex games/sims can turn out to lack a decent multiplayer aspect. At least, imo, computer AI in single player offline modes never seem to equate to the fun that comes from being challenged by human opponents. It would be great if Falcon 4 or any other jet sim could live up to the diversity that Il2 presents. Which is why i always seem to ask more about the multiplayer part of it, more so than the graphics and modeling. Not to bag on Il2, but it also seems like the multiplayer servers are lagging behind. I'm not sure the reasons for this, but a few months ago it seemed like at any given time of the day i could find at least one or two servers with 30 or more players. Now it seems like more than 20 is a treat, and that's usually only at certain hours.

Frankthetank36
05-12-2010, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:

How would i ever figure it out? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif With all the hoops in Il2, i would think you'd have no problems adjusting to a later sim. I have seen some stuff on falcon 4, and a lot of it looks pretty exciting. It comes with a 750 page manual if that gives you any clue to how much more complex of a sim it is. I wouldn't discourage anyone from looking into it, especially coming from Il2.
I find that even the more complex games/sims can turn out to lack a decent multiplayer aspect. At least, imo, computer AI in single player offline modes never seem to equate to the fun that comes from being challenged by human opponents. It would be great if Falcon 4 or any other jet sim could live up to the diversity that Il2 presents. Which is why i always seem to ask more about the multiplayer part of it, more so than the graphics and modeling. Not to bag on Il2, but it also seems like the multiplayer servers are lagging behind. I'm not sure the reasons for this, but a few months ago it seemed like at any given time of the day i could find at least one or two servers with 30 or more players. Now it seems like more than 20 is a treat, and that's usually only at certain hours.

The hoops in IL-2 are nothing compared to the hoops in modern jet sims, from what I understand. Even in a real plane with a reciprocating engine (I am just finishing up getting my private pilot's license in a Piper Warrior, and it is of course far simpler than most of the stuff in WWII, let alone a modern fighter), you don't just crank the magnetos, set the flaps, taxi to the runway, and take off. You need to go through multiple checklists first (and not just the preflight). IL-2 does not simulate this, and that is why it is able to model something like 230 flyable planes. Someone earlier said that it takes at least 15 minutes and 100+ clicks just to get the F-16's engine started, and that is why the game only has one aircraft. Granted, I'm not sure what this does to multiplayer. Is it just limited to co-ops and F-16s versus other F-16s? BoB is supposedly going to model multiple planes in high fidelity, and I assume that is why it STILL isn't released.

The other day I downloaded the demo for Lock On and I was pleasantly surprised. I've heard of all sorts of graphical bugs, but I just set everything at medium settings and had no problems. Kind of disappointed by the lack of a clickable cockpit, but it seems kinda like an IL-2: Modern Edition in that you just press buttons to do stuff and it is relatively simple (although still a lot more complex than IL-2 because you have to manage systems: took me 10 minutes just to figure out why the weapons in the A-10 weren't firing when I pressed the trigger, and I am still trying to figure out why they sometimes sporadically decide not to fire even when I have them armed (and then 5 seconds later, I can fire them, but by then I have already passed over the target).

Not sure about the Strike Fighters series, they have received pretty mixed reviews.

ggb123
05-19-2010, 04:04 AM
LOMAC: Flaming Cliffs 2

I been a big fan of its since Flanker 2.0



Strike Fighter: Project 1

Not bad neither

rfxcasey
05-19-2010, 09:02 AM
I've played allied forces before and I don't think it is that complicated to get off the ground. My biggest problem was learning all the radar modes and such. It is however a very very good flight simulator for modern jets. Though it is seriously dated I found Red Jets to be a lot of fun and not to hard to learn. Never used the Open falcon project but looks very interesting.

Lock on for me was, well.....kind of meh. It looks ok but it just doesn't seem like a very good program in general.

If I were going to look into a modern jet sim I would seriously consider Open falcon.

Oh and almost forgot to mention. Though it is not that modern, Mig Ally seemed pretty kool though I only checked it out once or twice. If you like Vietnam/Koren War stuff IL-2 also has some migs and sabres now so it might be worth looking into.

I would have figured my now someone would have made a modern jet mod for IL-2. You could probably make some radar using the map code. As far as missle tracking and lock on you would have to make that from scratch.

p-11.cAce
05-19-2010, 10:14 AM
The hoops in IL-2 are nothing compared to the hoops in modern jet sims

Hoops in IL2?? The "full switch" start procedure in Falcon 4.0AF takes 8-10 minutes. In Blackshark you can get the Ka50 running and ready to go in about the same time, it usually takes me at least 10 minutes to get the systems up and everything running for brake release. These are just the start procedures mind you. Programming navigation, learning weapons systems, figuring out how to coordinate -navigate-communicate-obliterate all at the same time is a whole 'nother ball of wax. Really fun though http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

rfxcasey
05-19-2010, 10:29 AM
I'm sorry did I say open falcon I ment free falcon. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blush.gif