Foka1

I see no difference between R-13M and R-13M1. Maybe heat signature playing role here aswell, that is my next thing to check. Currently we tried to check different regimes: AIM-9P5 has tone on MiG-21 with military power and ofcourse on afterburner from up to ~8 Km distance, effective range on speeds ~ 1000 Km/h starting from 3.2-3.5 KM rear aspect. R-13M has tone on F-5: 1) with afterburner from up to 6-7 KM 2) without afterburner on military power from 2.2 KM! Giving into account that F-5 has two engines I dunno if its legit or not.. But that one sure will not be fixed soon even if its not legit. Effective range of R-13M on speeds ~ 1000 KM/h starting from ~2.1 KM rear aspect. Clusters in DCS has effect but its a matter of amount of bomblets per square meter. Angle and altitude of unguided cluster bomb matters aswell. Without CCRP it is hard to drop them effectively, although if you want to kill at least one target and you can't pinpoint bomb drop then maybe they will be handy. A-10s clusters works because their bomblets are guided..

We did more tests with my mate between R-13M and AIM-9P5, looks like my conclusion that R-13M broken again was premature. Although looks like AIM-9P5 has ~ 1KM more range and it gives tone far before R-13 does.. In the end they could be comparable, we will do more tests..

So currently we have this: T-55s Can be killed with MiG-21 S-5 rockets (57 mm), BUT in order to do that one should put something like 8 rokets straight into tank chassis preferrably side aspect, its not easy to do in clean environment and will be harder with enemy planes interfering with this.. F-5 has FFAR HEAT rockets its 70 mm , technically they should kill T-55 aswell but I'm having a hard time to put them right into tank chassis. So both planes can technically kill T-55 tanks with their rockets but it will demand snipe shots from pilots. In that case I see two options: 1) leave T-55 tanks, it is not easy at all to kill them with rockets, but possible 2) Replace T-55 with T-72 MBT, BUT while T-72 is practically rocket proof, at the same time T-72 have more defence from bombs, it will require snipe bombing, which is not that easy to do on both planes because: mig-21) people say it has CCIP but it is not a CCIP at all, it is so inaccurate so it is giving you only slight idea where bomb will hit. Bombing in MiG-21 is better because at least some gyro help but that help is almost useless without flight discipline, also MiG-21 doesn't have centerline bomb slot. F-5) while F-5 doesn't have gyro help for bombing, it can carry more bombs, and also it has snake eyes bombs, which can be mounted by 5 pieces in centerline slot and just dispensed riple above target which is greatly increase chanses on hit because it is 5 bombs and they have aerodynamic brake which makes pilot pickle calculations easier If guys can do some tryouts for bombing in both planes and post statistics here it will help to do educational decision

I tested R-13 today... its broken again and has seeker and range from R-55 (Track from 2 KM rear aspect)... Otherwise I would suggest to make match with R-13M vs AIM9-P (not P5).. But since R-13 is broken again and we don't know when they can copy CORRECT files from openBeta to stable we stuck with what we have now.

Sure, I will do more tests regarding small rockets. But I can say right now that you can restrict S-24 and Kh-66 Grom for MiG-21 right away. On other weapons I will do checks. Since you never know what can be bugged, as I recently found out that R-13M missile for MiG-21 is broken again in stable DCS version and has range of 2 km :doh:

First of all. Where did you guys take that "REALISM" thing? I'm not complaining about REALISM here. If we would talk about realism I would suggest to redo WHOLE event. But I always say your house your rules. This event aimed at other things which I also understand. I'm questioning only logic behind restrictions. About realism - I'm actually preparing my own event testing name "3rd gen league" for a three months already (when I have free time from my job) where I would like to see all of you guys, preparation would go faster if I had some testing teams 3 to 5 pilots! I totally agree about limitating amount of missiles per plane. And I was the one actually who proposed to restrict KH-66 Grom to Mav on facebook.. " I think the MiGs have an advantage in a head to head when the aircraft know where each other are." did you see video I made or tacview? Yes radar missile will not react to flares but at the same time MiG needs to keep lock and F-5 can maneuver as he wants after launching his missiles. Let's put all aside, answer only on one question why R3R should be banned if AIM-9P5 is all aspect and is not banned? Keep in mind that restriction 2 missiles per aircraft will stand..

How about shooting Aim-9P5 in salvos from 6.5 KM range front aspect?? (wait you don't even need to keep lock! )

Buit that is what MIG-21 designed to do! It is interceptor, it should fly, attack and get back, F-5 was made as MiG-21 adversary with better maneuverability in mind.. You strip it from MiG-21 but you can't strip maneuverability from F-5.. Regarding roll over is not good tactic as you can stall your engine easily, you will have like couple seconds to see targets and even if you lock one, lock will be dropped as soon as you roll back in 90% of cases. Regarding R3R telling you from experience they are so shite you don't shoot them from R max, R max is 0 % hit as F-5 will see it on RWR anyway, in order to connect R3R you need to wait better range with red light indicator on radar and even then its not great, I shot two R3Rs in salvo once head on in F-5 from 4 Km he just did hard turn and evaded both missiles easily actually that all got me think that even if R3R is allowed then people would take mostly R-60M anyway.. Its just if F-5 knows that there will not be R3R for sure it is different knowledge advantage.. And since you told something about front aspect please look at the tacview I've attached, I killed MiG-21 from 5.6 KM front aspect with AIM-9P5.... How is R3R is threat for you i nF-5 when you see that??? F-5_front_aspect.zip

I already did answered to you o nthat in FB page... You chose to not answer on my comment but instead repeat this one here, lets find out all pros and cons together.. Here is my FB answer: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Its not like MiG-21 has BVR.. missile flies 2-7 seconds... If go for guns only its way better to do MiG-15 vs Sabre no brainer... Also when you telling "As it stands, all the MiG-21s need to do is load up radar missiles, fire en masse, and then use their superior speed to run away from the close-in fight and RTB for refuel rearm. " Try to disect this statement to pieces.. Basically you telling lets take MiG-21 advantages and put them in recycle bin :D And limit them to what they are not designed to do... Also "load radar missiles and fire in MAss" is pure lol: first of all effective range of R3R is even worse than R-60M sometimes its 3-5 km and MiG needs to keep a lock. Also when MiG-21 has radar ON ALL F-5s instantly see where MiGs at, therefore ALL F-5s giving instant picture and SA which is far more better advantage than 3 km range radar missile. Plus MiG-21 Radar useless on altitudes below 2 KM and has no control over antenna elevation. WHile F-5 has already better SA from RWR and plus it has better radar which antenna elevation you can adjust and find migs before they will find you. All migs will see is just two ****ing DOTS on their RWR if they lucky... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You know me :D For me it will remove last bits of seriousness of this event instantly... In that case you just can do another furball event.. 3rd gen missile fights is pure action "top gun" ish thing when guy trying to get a "lock" if we are talking about entertainment for viewers, provided it will be commentated properly. You remove missiles and there will be almost no point for teams to prepare some tactics and shit for A2A IMO because of planes itself, its not MiG-15 and sabre or WW2 planes... Besides I reckon there will be a cases when all missiles spent and guys will go for guns anyway, especially F-5s as they have advantage in maneuvering in close horizontal fight and they have automatic radar modes which gives them same firing solution pipper as for 4th gen planes with vertical scan..

[Vodka]LazzySeal - MiG-21

LN уже как бы ответили что работают над АСП. Не знаю включает ли это в себя логику переключателя пилонов или нет.. Что кроме этого надо ещё протолкнуть?

Please make Su-25A slots, I want to take 8 KMGU containers and dispense them above ground targets..

Harle решил наступать :) https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=183154

Спасибо. Это капец... Особенно насчёт переключатель приоритета вооружения

Товарищи соберите пожалуйста все претензии и мысли по багам и структурируйте и пришлите мне. Я вижу, что пишут к багтрекеру уже подходили. Я хочу долбить до последнего. У меня есть контакт с разработчиками и я попытаюсь донести всё это. У нас есть маленький сквад и мы летаем на МиГ-21 в DCS с релиза. Я чувствую всю вашу боль :) Нужно создать структурированный баг лист с которым будет проще подойти к девам. Если не удалось один раз в багтрекере, давайте долбить ещё. Структурируйте мне список репортов я его переведу на английский и будет что предъявить при следующем контакте. Если будет сразу на английском то вообще супер! Спасибо! Нам нужно хотя бы получить ответ что будет починено, что технически невозможно и т.д. Нужен хоть какой то ответ, отказ в каких либо фиксах, тоже ответ..

Товарищи а вы это репортили в официальный баг трекер Leatherneck?

Looks like it :smartass:

I can add something like time less 2 seconds and make it check RANDOM condition only for 2 seconds for instance, but at this point I'm curious if its a bug or a feature...

So I tried to play with RANDOM condition for triggers.. I've setup simple mission with convoy and 3 ambush points along the way with probability of 1% (initially it was 10%). Ambush point is a group with late activation, Trigger for activation is set to once and condition is RANDOM 1%, ACTION is specific group activation with debug message: So after mission start all three groups are spawned like it was probability of 100%.... It is only matter of time. Looks like RANDOM condition checking itself in real time continously if you don't add other condition, until trigger action is done... Should it work like that? Convoy_test.miz

Its simple.. There is given area... Mission is recon on that area (it could be 100 Km radius for instance in mountains) and find enemy outpost.. purpose of mission is flytime and VFR and of course to stall guys while I'm making next one.. Squad is fluid, people come, people quit.. Not all of them I can trust to not check mission file, so then specifically fly to that place and provide me tacview with result later (and screenshots ofcourse). I just made one example, there is others I'm sure. Mostly when training involved you need to lock things and current DCS tools can't provide that...

I bring you guys new side of this.. I want to create campaign for my squadron a PvE one. So my squadron is rather free of any mandatory events so dynamic campaign with my edits is a way to go. For instance I do recon mission, place enemy AI base "somewhere"... Then I'm telling my guys look before attack we need recon find enemy base make screenshots from altitude so we can plan attack. Then I say which zone they need to scan. That way everyone can participate in any time by loading .miz file and try to do recon flight in marked area to find enemy base. BUT I CAN'T PROTECT mission FILE!! So fun will be spoiled if one of the guys just open mission in editor and see all locations null sweat! Or for instance if you have student and you give him a task with same distributed .miz file for him to work with... Stop this stupid argument. THERE SHOULD BE A WAY TO PROTECT CONTENTS OF .MIZ FILE THAT YOU'VE CREATED PERIOD. Password protected .miz files already was implemented in lock on!

[Vodka]LazzySeal MiG-15

eeeehm If there will be two teams.. How we suppose to IFF?? Different liveries at least? Or as soon as we merge everyone for themselves?

You don't need to explain it to me though. I just said the reason. I wasn't one who complained. Also think about those people who never flew FC3 events and come to DCS with MiG-21 F-5 or Mirage lately, how they are going to earn something for that short period of time? (just a thought since you described me something). As I said your house - your rules, stupid to say otherwise. Frankly I don't even know what nepotism means and I don't want to google it cuz obviously I'm lazzy. I was just pointing out that those people complained not over nothing I analyzed and pointed it out as my humble opinion... And another humble opinion "This is no MVP community voting or AI shooting contest, this is white knuckle PvP where only proficiency, skills and experience can set you apart." I can say that about Counter Strike or Rocket League for instance or StarCraft, sorry but not about DCS, at least in its current state. And you addressed it, competitive for DCS is not really a word right now. Simple thing like TrackIR already can divide people (there will be exceptions ofcourse). Take it as my personal feedback (means you can say me to **** off and I will receive it :D ): if you would keep it in simple words and more humble there would be no people with butthurt complaining in thread about rankings and stuff." Just simple usage of "PvP based community with X years experience" instead of " This is no MVP community voting or AI shooting contest, this is white knuckle PvP where only proficiency, skills and experience can set you apart" already would set another mood. Its not like you selling used cars, right?