LOMAC - Advice

[Guest]

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

Hi All,

I'm just getting back into flight simming after a few years and it's
been excellent - pulled out the flanker 2.5 cd and it's all comming
back to me.

I have a lowly pP4 - 2Ghz with 512Mb of RAM and 128Mg NVidia card...

My question is - I would like to buy LOMAC, but I remember hating those
sims that ran like a dog or you had to turn all of the detail down to
decent fram rates - Will this be one of those on my system?

If so I am having a ball with Flanker 2.5 and I will just stick to
that...

Any advice / info appreciated

James

 

[sodium]

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

"Lawsy" <vedder@transfieldservices.com> wrote in message
news:1117082450.994505.327060@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Hi All,
>
> I'm just getting back into flight simming after a few years and it's
> been excellent - pulled out the flanker 2.5 cd and it's all comming
> back to me.
>
> I have a lowly pP4 - 2Ghz with 512Mb of RAM and 128Mg NVidia card...
>
> My question is - I would like to buy LOMAC, but I remember hating those
> sims that ran like a dog or you had to turn all of the detail down to
> decent fram rates - Will this be one of those on my system?
>
> If so I am having a ball with Flanker 2.5 and I will just stick to
> that...
>
> Any advice / info appreciated
>
> James
>

Which Nvidia card? There's a lot of different Nvidia cards with 128mb or ram
on them. I'm guessing you have a Geforce4. Even on my P4 3.0ghz, R9800pro,
1gb ram it doesn't run all that great IMO, it's acceptable but could have
been better if they *optimized* it better. You can download some mod tweaks
that make it run better though. It runs mostly ok but it has the usual
stutter issues during heavy action sequences which I absolutely hate in any
flight sim. You would definitely have to turn down to medium settings and
get some of the tweaks applied.

 

[fisher]

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

On 25 May 2005 21:40:51 -0700, "Lawsy" <vedder@transfieldservices.com>
wrote:

>Hi All,
>
>I'm just getting back into flight simming after a few years and it's
>been excellent - pulled out the flanker 2.5 cd and it's all comming
>back to me.
>
>I have a lowly pP4 - 2Ghz with 512Mb of RAM and 128Mg NVidia card...
>
>My question is - I would like to buy LOMAC, but I remember hating those
>sims that ran like a dog or you had to turn all of the detail down to
>decent fram rates - Will this be one of those on my system?
>
>If so I am having a ball with Flanker 2.5 and I will just stick to
>that...
>
>Any advice / info appreciated
>
>James

Take a look at these benchmarks of LOMAC running on top end vid cards
and take note of the piss poor frame rates even on a 6800ultra. LOMAC
is a dog, save your money.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/r420-2_24.html

 

[Guest]

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

Lawsy wrote:
> (...)
> My question is - I would like to buy LOMAC, but I remember hating those
> sims that ran like a dog or you had to turn all of the detail down to
> decent fram rates - Will this be one of those on my system?

Could be. It ran on my old AMD 900MHz, GeForce 2 GTS system with all
options turned down. Even then, the looks surpass Flanker 2.5 and the
flight performance (smoothness) was OK. But missions are another thing:
blow something to pieces and the framerates drop so much that it is not
fun anymore. Your system is better so it might be OK by a small margin.

The good news is that there is a downloadable demo, so you can check by
yourself.

> If so I am having a ball with Flanker 2.5 and I will just stick to
> that...

I wish I could be that wise, sometimes.

Regards,
Mr. Sylvestre

 

[jp]

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

"Lawsy" <vedder@transfieldservices.com> wrote in message
news:1117082450.994505.327060@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Hi All,
>
> I'm just getting back into flight simming after a few years and it's
> been excellent - pulled out the flanker 2.5 cd and it's all comming
> back to me.
>
> I have a lowly pP4 - 2Ghz with 512Mb of RAM and 128Mg NVidia card...
>
> My question is - I would like to buy LOMAC, but I remember hating those
> sims that ran like a dog or you had to turn all of the detail down to
> decent fram rates - Will this be one of those on my system?
>
> If so I am having a ball with Flanker 2.5 and I will just stick to
> that...
>
> Any advice / info appreciated
>
> James


It's basically the same game/F3, and wouldn't run to well on your rig, so
I'd stick to F2 myself.






>

 

[Guest]

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

On 25 May 2005 21:40:51 -0700, Lawsy wrote:

>Hi All,
>
>I'm just getting back into flight simming after a few years and it's
>been excellent - pulled out the flanker 2.5 cd and it's all comming
>back to me.
>
>I have a lowly pP4 - 2Ghz with 512Mb of RAM and 128Mg NVidia card...
>
>My question is - I would like to buy LOMAC, but I remember hating those
>sims that ran like a dog or you had to turn all of the detail down to
>decent fram rates - Will this be one of those on my system?

I run LOMAC quite happily on a 1.7GHz CPU and an NVidia GF4 card
(Ti4400). It's perfectly flyable and looks stunning. I can't run it
maxed out, but it isn't far off.

My approach is slightly unorthodox: I install a new sim with all
sliders maxed out - then gradually decrease them (if necessary).

With LOMAC, I'd say a lot depends on your video card ... whereas
Falcon4 seems to be a lot more CPU dependent.

Adamski.

 

[Guest]

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

Fisher wrote:
> Take a look at these benchmarks of LOMAC running on top end vid cards
> and take note of the piss poor frame rates even on a 6800ultra. LOMAC
> is a dog, save your money.
> http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/r420-2_24.html

While the frame rates of LOMAC are not stellar by any stretch of the
mind (but did any state-of-the-art flight sim ever achieve that on
contemporary hardware?), one should note that the in-game graphics
options are not specified for the above benchmark. I suspect these were
close to maxed out.

With reasonably balanced options, LOMAC looks good and plays fine on 24
months old hardware (P4 2.8GHz / ATI 9800). With the graphics options
turned all the way down, it still looks surprisingly good and is
playable on rather outdated hardware, as one other poster mentioned.

Whether you like the game, ED, Starforce, SimHQ,... or not is another
issue (re: your other post). BTW, LOMAC is not Starforce copy protected.
Only Flaming Cliffs is.

LOMAC can be found for as little as $10.00

Regards,
Mr. S.

 

[Guest]

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

On Fri, 27 May 2005 14:21:01 +0200, Mr. Sylvestre wrote:

>LOMAC can be found for as little as $10.00

If so, then it's *definitely* worth a try.

I have to add that there are some *amazing* LOMAC movies out there -
so when you're bored with being shot down, you can always star in your
own movie.

Andrew "That's a WRAP!" MacPherson is one to look out for and there's
a simply breathtaking formation flying display from a Russian team
(Moscow) that puts both our flying and film-making skills to shame.

All of these movies almost convince me that maybe I've never given
LOMAC the time it deserves. I seem to get put off too easily by the
positively *looney* GUI.

Adamski.

 

[Guest]

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

Thanks for the replies . I'll give those links a try. If they
don't work I'll sell it on EBAY ;-)
_________________________________________________________^M
Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.yourdomain.com^M
Visit www.yourdomain.com and try our New products and services today!