Jump to content

Nick Bones

Members
  • Posts

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Luck I would probably say that it would be a mirror match, and ultimately luck would win the day.
  2. The su27 is faster, it carries more missiles and it has longer range, but the f16 has got just as good radar as the one on the su27, it is as manuverable and it carries better missiles (aim120). Keep in mind that the f16 was designed to take down other 4th generation fighters and under no circumstances it should be underestimated. In that mission you should ignore the f16 and only take down the drones, do not worry you will have pleanty of falcons and eagles to take down in the following missions. As on how to properly fight in a flanker, google su27 by Santi871. It is a very good start.
  3. As i originally stated, i do not play MP (i do not have nor time nor will to dedicate much time to it) so i care very little about balance in the game between airframes. It just bugs me that the most advanced missile in the russian arsenal present in DCS is not available on the most advanced russian plane. I'd be willing to sacrifice some historical accuracy in order to have that, and i wanted to see if i was the only one that felt that way. From the comment it surely seems so ;).
  4. Fair enough, i can agree with that.
  5. If you all are fine dealing with the upcoming F-18 and Thypoons on board of flankers armed with nothing more than SAHM then there's nothing to add, all is fine the way it is. If we are waiting for something new like some newer version of Flankers in order to even-out the fight, that is also fine, but in my opinion this is not happening anytime soon. For all the rest there is my suggestion which is to kindly ask for the addition of R-77 to su-27/33 evening out the BVR fight with NATO planes without taking away anything to anyone. To those that are saying that it is not 100% historically accuratec, my answer is "big wooop, who cares" :) .
  6. I strongly disagree, due to it's easy learning curve, combined with still great FM and realistic systems, adding a couple of new planes (not for free obvioulsy) to FC3, such as the f16 IMO would be a great addition to an already outstanding title. But you are right, I was probably unfair when i stated that ED has given little attentions to FC3. The problem is just that they are not going in the direction where i would like them to go, and i get a little frustrated for this reason.
  7. Thanks for the replies. Sounds like there is not much hope to see this change anytime soon. It's a pitty that such a good game as FC3 is getting so little attention from their developers, but still, it's lightyears ahead of any other flight simulator out there (with a modern setting) and i'm still going to enjoy it for the forseeable future dispite its shortcomings.
  8. I am a great fan of Russian planes, but there is something i do not understand, how is it possible that the su-27/33 cannot mount R-77 missiles, when IRL they obviously can? I feel that the only reason this has been done is to make people use mig-29s in multiplayer, and maybe to give an handicap to the su-27/33 BVR capabilities agains the f-15, but this is IMO unacceptable because of the following reasons: the f-15 is more capable of engaging su-27/33, they do not need any special favours. the su-27/33 needs to be able to engage multiple targets simultaneously, like it can IRL taking advantage of its the more powerful radar compared to the mig-29. mig-29 were designed as a lighter, cheap, shorter range version of the su-27, but still capable of carrying the same weapons. to me it makes no sense that they can use more advanced missiles than their big sukhoi's brothers while being inferior in all other aspects. Does anyone have some good explanation? am i the only one bothered by this?
×
×
  • Create New...