

Max1mus
Members-
Posts
643 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by Max1mus
-
If ED ever puts that on the "planned" list, sure. But they never mentioned it at all. And until they do, the priority must be a modern fighter that can compete with the existing and upcoming modern NATO planes, that means F-16, F-18, F-15E, Eurofighter. A mix between low and full fidelity could be the answer, with simplified features getting replaced by fully clickable ones (for example MFD pages) more and more over time. Its not too different from how some existing full fidelity aircraft are being released and updated.
-
The R-77 and R-27ER are superior to AIM-54 within 10-15km. Surviving until then is not much of an issue, IF you have a GCI handholding you and informing you of the exact position of F-14. You 100% rely on that GCI to tell you which aircraft is of what type, since all your garbage soviet RWR will say is "Fighter". The beautiful thing about more modern MiG-29 (like K or OVT) is that they can be used without all these small things that DCS does not have modelled. You could put them into any DCS environment and expect them to do well and the pilot to have fun. On top of that, ED wouldnt have to go through the effort of creating realistic GCI and Lazur DL, which, chances are, they wouldnt do anyway for a long, long time.
-
In the specific matchup against a 90s tomcat, if it was modelled properly in terms of EW etc. (which it isnt), a 29S MIGHT be ok if ED goes through the effort of reworking GCI entirely. Against everything else, 29S is unacceptable. Unless the opposition has no Link16 (so just Multiplayer F-15, AI one has it too) and just 90s weapons 120A/B and 9M, its going to get owned. Especially due to all the adjustments to the core game ED needs to make to even allow a 29 to fight realistically. On the topic of MiG-21, how many people bought it compared to the modern modules and FC3? Which content apart from instant action missions and the occasional cold war server population spikes is available for it? How many people will buy another MiG-21 like plane after also getting the upcoming MiG-23MLA? A late 2000s variant is the only way, especially if you want to take advantage of the interest in russian aircraft by making further modules. The A/S variants do not satisfy the desire, especially since they are in the game already.
-
The MiG-29 can be a match for an F-14 with equal numbers, but you need: - A more modern MiG-29 variant than the A, at least S - Properly modelled GCI/Lazur Datalink - Properly modelled F-14 missiles and EW resistance of radar People are not going to buy a fighter module just to get shot down or retreat from every fight. We need a modern red one first, FC3 level if it has to be. After that ED can think about covering niche masochists that want what is essentially an upgraded MiG-23.
-
No one restricts loadouts. People wanting all toys are coming in, the ones that did support restrictions are leaving. The best funded AI in the world can barely win in guns only BFM. There is no way ED can make a dynamic, intelligent AI GCI choosing to make the MiGs do the exact right thing (radar on push off, surround or press?) when necessairy.
-
https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=250456&d=1603062188 As long as this is a thing, no dynamic campaigns involving russian 4th gens can be made. Modern russian fighters arent symmetric either. They put IRST on every plane, are datalinked with just about every ground radar (unlike DCS F-15/16/18) and rely on high speed, long range missiles with different seekerheads. Su-35s fly CAP in Syria with R-77-1 and R-27ET to this day, and the R-37 provides the kinematic advantage, although we are unlikely to see that one in DCS. Not to speak of the entirely different multirole focus, every NATO fighter needs a TGP for striking the quite numerous opposing ground targets/SAMs, while the priority for russian ones are high speed anti ship missiles for striking the quite numerous opposing ships. On top of that, for the soviet, pre Su-27/MiG-31 way of flying, you need an entirely reworked GCI in DCS. Just BRAA calls and no Lazur Datalink will not do. And even if we did have a smart, datalinked GCI, which i can not imagine happening in SP with current AI technology, you would be a chesspiece for GCI with no individual freedom, sometimes with GCI remote controlling your radar and even aircraft. I personally dont mind it, but if i remember right, this is the biggest reason for people in DCS to not want a MiG-25 module. Most people that will spend 70$ on a "DCS MiG-29" will want to use its only relevant role, air superiority, to fight the newest NATO jets. I wonder what will make them feel like they got scammed more: -That the plane is the original variant and barely even a 4th generation fighter in terms of avionics -That they have to give up all freedom and execute strict GCI commands. -That that GCI will always either make them retreat or send them straight to death to mid 2000s AIM-120C and they have no way to prevent this failure -That the GCI and its datalink arent modelled and they are on their own with no SA Its either a modern variant, or a big failure for DCS and especially economically for ED. Most of the few people that will be tricked into buying it, will never again spend money on a future russian module, especially another more modern MiG-29 variant.
-
If they stick with that, DCS is 100% ****ed. This logic doesnt make sense for russian modules, since the truly interesting stuff can only be made in FC3. And frankly, with more technology comes more depth, regardless what modelling standard. The simplified Su-25T, with its TGP features, mercury/Anti radiation pod and TV guided bombs is much more complex and versatile than a full fidelity Su-25A could ever be. And thats just air to ground. Imagine an FC3 Su-30MKI/SM. You would have 2 seats which on its own is a fun multiplier in MP, true air to ground/anti ship capabilities, and ability to play in any time frame, without forcing anyone to have their weapons restricted. Some MFD functions even. The variety of weapons you can employ alone gives you much more to discover than a clicky cockpit upgrade of the measly DCS MiG-29A with its niche, mediocre air to air role and no real air-to ground. If ED adds an FC3 MiG-29K on top of that, you would get aircraft carrier operations on top! If that doesnt sound much more tasty, then i dont know what will.
-
DCS 2000s scenarios for F-16 and F-18 impossible
Max1mus replied to Max1mus's topic in DCS Core Wish List
Check the tacview/track in the original post. Its an ADS with an S-300 covered by SA-15, and SA-11 surrounding it. A single F-18 kills them all, after having just turkey shot all enemy CAP on its own. It ends up gunning everything on the airport that this massive set of units is supposed to protect. We need capable units. An SA-15 that in a group, can intercept over a dozen JSOW, an S-300PMU, a modernized SA-11, and of course 21st century russian fighters. -
Wrong. They cant do a full fidelity one. They HAVE to make AI variants (as my track above showed) and give us simplified FC3 ones. When i replace even 2 of those planes by F-16, i suddenly am no longer able to pull this off. Because the fuel and missiles needed, assuming i somehow beat them, wouldnt allow me to even think about loading air to ground. Same if those systems were modern and S300PMU at least. You would need many more hornets firing many JSOWs in formation at the same time to get through those defenses.
-
I did. Check track above. Single F-18 just annihalates everything, because they are all 80s crap systems.
-
The problem here are the available russian/chinese AI units. We dont have the ones that are needed. Check the tacview. An Su-30K will not be able to destroy 4 F-18s, a patriot and roland sites all on its own. Improving the AI can only do so much, but will not solve the issue of post 2000s low RCS weapons like JSOWs and high energy, post 2000s modern actives, going through shitty 80s soviet equipment like butter.
-
https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=250456&d=1603062188 Here is an attempt to create a challenging mission. A single F-18 just kills everything, including 4 Su30 and an S300 site+SA15 escorts in one sortie. No support, no tactics. I thought DCS is supposed to be a simulation. Turns out ED wants it to be a NATO fanfiction, making a fortune on the western market.
-
1xF18vsRussia.zip I tried to recreate the Russian main Airbase in Syria, using the 80s equipment DCS offers instead of the modern systems that are required. The result - A single F-18 on its own with no AWACS or any other support: - Shoots down 4x the best russian fighters offered in DCS, early 90s SU-30 - Only a few minutes later destroys the entirety of the Airbase and the best russian available air defenses in DCS, early 80s SA-15 and S-300 All in the same sortie, no tactics needed. When will ED fix the red coalition and provide a realistic opponent for F-16 and F-18 owners? For singleplayer, at the very least, we need late 2000s assets for the AI, both in terms of fighters and air defenses, though i recommend to include 2010s assets to provide a challenge for experienced players. We also need all missiles to be modelled to the same standard, including R-27s which have still not gone through the CFD research one year after the AIM-120s and two years after the AIM-7. And for MP, we need some sort of flyable late 2000s+ fighter for the red side, at least modelled to FC3 standard, all popular servers just consist of NATO vs NATO boredom.
-
While our F-14 is from the 1990s and the F-15 carries the 2000s AIM-120C, i agree. And so Multiplayer sticks to NATO vs NATO 2000s, while in Singleplayer or PVE Multiplayer, people just turkey shoot these 80s systems. No one restricts weapons and avionics accordingly. As such, any MiG-29 or Su-27 module that isnt at least from after 2000, is entirely irellevant. There are no content, populated servers, missions for it. As such, a MiG-29A in the current DCS environment will be exactly as relevant as a MiG-21. We need a more modern one.
-
A short range maneuvering engagement above 0.5 miles will be fought with all missiles. Heaters will be flared, but an AIM-120 will force you to notch, give up initiative and most likely kill you. And a MiG-29A can not win that against anything past the 90s, even from an offensive position as you suggest. It doesnt matter what angle you come from. This GCI doctrine stops working when you add Link16 and active missiles to the equation, which is why post 90s russian/chinese fighters, including upgraded MiG-29, no longer rely on it. And if you add a numbers advantage and SAMs, you can do it with a DCS MiG-21 and MiG-23. Im not paying for another one of those. And as said, the 80s barely even exist in DCS in the form of campaigns or servers. So dont ask ED to waste their resources on another MiG-21. All it will do is scare the remaining redfor playerbase away from DCS. The DCS ecosphere needs a red modern, capable fighter, FC3 level if necessairy. Maybe add a new category of modules that are inbetween full and low fidelity.
-
No need. Half the stuff in DCS isnt modelled exactly as the real thing, we just need an authentic model of the planes and weapons the capabilities of which make sense within their timeframe. I assume by dogfight you mean general air to air. No, it cannot. With equal numbers, against an f-16 carrying 120C, the win rate is 0%. You hide, they fly in spread and pick you up. You mask? They fly high and pick you up. You try to take a BVR shot? F-16 see everything on Link16 and their 6x 120C outperform your measly 2 ERs, with your radar that can detect the F-16 by the time his AIM-120C is active already. Also no Jammer to make up for that problem while you can indeed be jammed. SA on F-16 is also higher even if you account for the Lazur Datalink (Which ED will not model, i guarantee you that). Now if we were talking about an 80s F-15,16,18, the SA gap would be nonexistant, if not in you/your GCIs favor.
-
Nowhere near a tossup. At one mile, 50 degrees off boresight, the DCS AMRAAM will make the turn and hit the target. Hell, ive seen it loop around in memory mode and kill someone after a 360 degree turn. So unless he happens to only detect you when youre already passing him, youre dead. And he has Link16 and all that, you dont even have a tactical display in MiG-29A. In short, either at the very minimum MiG-29K/Su-27SM3, or worthless planes with not a single advantage.
-
The AMRAAMs minimum range is well within a couple hundred feet. Any close combat situation outside that is an instant win for your opponent. Unlesss... MiG-29K/Su27SM3. R-77-1, modern RWR to assist with surviving within NEZ, equal chances. Server, singular. There is exactly one hosted by buddyspike, and it has less than 5 players most of the time. Realistic, GCI micromanaged campaigns dont exist either.
-
F-14 in DCS is a 90s variant - and also overperforming due to EDs EW modelling and missile API/lift problems. On top of that its not a redfor module. NATO in DCS is no longer in need of any modern aircraft. Redfor is. F-5, MiG-21 being modelled right now would indeed be an unacceptable waste of resources. 9.12 MiG-29 great? Have you ever tried the one that is currently in DCS? Is being shot down over and over again with no chance to fight back great? Given that its a pure air superiority fighter, it being unusable in that role any campaign or server makes the module almost unflyable. On top of excellent avionics and missiles and acceptable time on station as opposed to the 29A/S, the 29K has a fly-by-wire, making it especially capable in guns only BFM.
-
AIM-120s from the 90s, thats 120A and B, are a good match for MiG-29S. Range and speed of 120B isnt that good, and ECCM isnt either. R-27ER and R-77 are in combination an excellent match for 90s fighters like DCS F-15C with 120Bs. Problem is that DCS has late 2000s NATO fighters with Link16, 2000s missiles like SD-10, 120C, 9X. Possibly even a 2020s missile with the Eurofighter developer trying to put Meteor onto an early tranche for some reason. This means, anything less than MiG-29K is unacceptable. And no one gives a crap about time frame in DCS, in both Multiplayer and Singleplayer, which means you have nowhere to fly a non-modernized MiG-29. For FC3, just mess with some of the range/notch filter numbers and adjust the TWS2 function of the Mig-29S. Some mods, like MiG-31 ones, do this already. Full fidelity radars in DCS dont perform correctly, in most cases even more so than FC3 ones. F-16 - too much range, jamming immunity. JF-17 - detection of slow targets modelled entirely incorrectly, too strong return on RWR, TGP air to air mode tracks way too far. F-18 - jamming immunity, too strong return on RWR. In short, we can get a simplified MiG-29K/Su-27SM3 with R-77-1s, revolutionizing DCS by turning it from a mediocre red flag NATO vs NATO shitfest into an actual "combat simulator", or we can get a niche plane designed to compete in the 80s, with barely more relevance in the sim than the DCS Viggen or MiG-21. And if i may add, the unacceptable performance of a non-modernized MiG-29 compared to AIM-120C/Meteor and its nonexistant multirole capabilities will also make the majority of the DCS community never want to invest a single penny in any russian module ever again.
-
Whats wrong with the FC3 one? A few cockpit buttons? The HOTAS controls would be almost exactly the same.