Max1mus

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4491904&postcount=69 Если это "теоретически можно добавить, значит самолет в DCS получит" стал стандарт, мы получим тоже такие теоретические оружие на самолетах ГС3? Например Р-77-1 на МиГ-29С и J-11A, PL-12 на J-11A, 4 Р-27 на МиГ-29А.

Agreed. The standard has been lowered, if ED does not add these weapons and avionics to all aircraft, theres a severe double standard. I could think of a lot of things, R-77-1 on J-11A/MiG-29S and a more accurate version of SPO-15 that is used on Su-24, R-27P/EP. Will this happen or do we have to create a massive shitstorm on hoggit and this section of the forums first? I wouldnt mind, but its a lot of work.

To fly the MiG-29 and provide an equally dangerous opponent for NATO you need: - A fast-thinking GCI that is well aware of how every BVR fight and all missile ranges. MiG-29 versions in DCS are ancient soviet ones that are meant to be fully controlled by GCI. Dont make too many decisions on your own, its all the GCIs job. Dont like it? Ask the developers for MiG-29K/SMT (built for being able to work independently) or fly the flanker, which is also built to be able to work independently. - At least one other fighter flying near you, if possible even a wingman on comms with you. This can even just be a MiG-21 also controlled by GCI, but you need this secondary factor to add more chaos and make your higher speed R-27ER effective. - Most importantly: A SERVER NOT PUTTING YOU UP AGAINST POST 1990s WEAPONS. This means no BVR missiles newer than AIM-120Bs. As of right now, these playable (and populated) servers are: BF Syria Modern (partially 90s) BF Persian Gulf Modern (partially 90s) BF caucasus 80s (fully 80s, R-27R and AIM-7 only). If youre planning on flying russian aircraft or the J-11A, i recommend not flying on any other servers. Want to compete with AIM-120C, 9X, SD-10? Ask the developers for MiG-29K/SMT, Su-27SM3, Su-30MKI or something similar.

Looks like i am available. Please move Gryphon 33 | Maximus to MiG-29A

That's wrong. Most servers infact used to restrict to the 90s before 2019. Openconflict - 90s. Blue Flag - 80s server and a 90s PG server. Even the 104th server, whose owners absolutely hate any kind of restrictions, was running AIM-120Bs (90s) for a long while until late 2018 on top of a lot of 80s SARH missions. It just made sense to do so. But with all the new players joining DCS, people dont want an authentic fight, they want the newest toys and are willing to enjoy turkey shoots. For this reason red FC3 needs something. Make some changes to Su-27S and make it a Su-27SM3 or add PL-12 to the J-11A. Or add AI assets like J-11B and Su-30MKI to start with at least. Until then, have fun flying as US Navy vs US Air Force over Russian Mainland.

Meteor was deployed in 2019-2020 and is carried by Eurofighters with AESA radars. Thats as if we got Su-57, F-22 and R-37 in DCS all of a sudden. No, what happens is that NATO jets are put on both sides and no one flies the soviet ones. The DCS community seems to be unwilling to accept timeframe accurate weapon restrictions (Like 1995 -> 120B+9M, no JSOW or SLAM). Maybe also because this would mean to exclude/neuter the JF-17 which doesnt carry missiles from before the 2000s. Singleplayer is even worse, since there is 0 timeframe accurate content for 80s Su-27S/MiG-29A and 90s J-11A and MiG-29S. No campaigns running mainly R-27Rs against AIM-7M for 80s, no campaigns running R-27ER and RVV-AE against AIM-120Bs for 90s.

Higher quality, but not full fidelity versions of some FC3 modules are a great idea! Make people pay an extra amount for them to make the effort worthwhile. Would be a great opportunity to upgrade the avionics of some planes to what they had in the 2000s, aswell.

Its a sad truth that ED and the MP server owners would rather accept modding a WIP missile onto a plane that did not carry it, than support a modernization of FC3 modules or just run a 90s scenario with a few restrictions.

There are no interesting campaigns or popular servers that do this. Even 90s weapons like no 9X, and only AIM-120B would do. But no one wants to run it or create such singleplayer content. And as such the red planes are unplayable. What doesnt help here is that the JF-17 and its missiles are mostly from at least the early 2000s, meaning it would have to be excluded from 80s and realistically 90s scenarios, making such restricted servers even less popular. Thus, the only option is an upgrade of existing FC3 modules: Su-25A->Su-25SM, Su-27S->Su-27SM3, MiG-29S->MiG-29SMT If none of the above are doable, put the PL-12 onto the J-11A. A single J-11A prototype carried PL-12, but it was only put into service on the J-11B. However, 3rd party devs add whatever they want to their modules these days anyway and even ED is selling out (triple mavericks on F-16).

Whatever the desired effectiveness is, please only release such changes when they are applied to all relevant missiles. Updating and releasing these changes for one type of missile first (like actives) leads to having different missiles that follow an entirely different physics standard in the simulator. And please add them to the changelog too, while this may cause outrages on hoggit, it saves people a lot of time figuring out what changed through Trial & Error.

Please move me to MiG-21 reserve. Unsure if i can be there.

He has stated many times in this thread that the overall chaff resistance should be the same. So it is a bug. Run the shooters tracks and you avoid this chaff desync. The singleplayer testing was done using AI vs AI, which dont challenge the missile properly and unfold the fine differences, as dundun explained. In terms of realism, i dont know how realistic a 5 second, total immunity to any amount (even 1 million) of countermeasures is. The balance argument makes little sense, since even with the old chaff resistance none of the red FC3 planes could win against AIM-120C.

Deka Ironworks коэффициент СД-10 тоже снизили с 1.5 на 0.08 (но режим памяти к нему не добавили) чтобы осталась одинакоао в отношение к AMRAAM.

Yeah, Syria is really not attractive for red pilots at all. As you mentioned, apart from the Ka-50 (and maybe Su-25T, although it lacks the upgraded L-150 RWR) everything else is just way too old to recreate any Russian operations. And even from the Israeli/NATO side it is not much better, given how all the opposing red AI fighters/weapons and SAMs are at best from the late 80s, if lucky early 90s. While the map itself is pretty, definitely not worth the money until these issues are adressed.

Спрасите любого человека из группы тестеров. Вы единственный, который так говорит. Первая новость о новый помехозащиты ракеты перед патча ксати от тестера была "ракету нотчить в 10 раз тяжелее!". Ну после вашых ответов я думаю, что вы прекрасно знаете, ну из-за какой-то причины врете. Может, старые, меньше против диполи эффективные 120ки тоже так протих тупых ботах испытывали? Не знаю. Такое изменеие пожалуйста в следующий раз к патчьлоге добавите. Пока активные ракеты в DCS так и в >5 раз хуже сриваются, чем в 2.5.5 и вы семиактивные ракеты не на сравнивый стандарт помехозащиты повыщите, из красной перспективи новые самолеты (и карты) покупать тоже безполезно, если у него Р-77-1 с 5-секундным иммунитетом против диполи как у новый -120 нет. С 1980их не начните, таких интересных кампании и популярных серверов нет.

Все согласны и это же говорят. Или люди из ED хотят, что так было и врут, или из-за какой-то причины ошыбку сделали и нам не верят. Несколько патча назад у 120B устойчивность была такая же, как у Р-77. Сейчас нет.

Я не имею в виду энергию. Я говорю о далности, где изматывать ракету не возможно. Режим памяти сделал, что ракета в течение несколько секунд на диполи не реагирует. Вы говорите что влияние ловушек в режиме памяти должно быть. Это влияние к -120 добавите?

Это прости против ботах, которые правильно защитится даже на самой высокий сложности не умеют. Даже умерают против ракет выпущенны на 90км, по тому, что они после новых ракет патчь не получили и еще так же летают как против ракет 2.5.4.

Извените, ну этот результат не отражает реальность в DCS. Спрасите самые лучшые группы выртуальних летчиков из соревнования "SATAL": TAW (1. место в "Diamond" и "Gold", летчики Ф14/15/16/18/M2000), 104th (2. место в "Diamond", летчики Ф14/15/16/18 ), pan (2. место в "Gold", летчики Су27), и так далее. Они все вам потверждут, что сривать новые 120ки в сравнение со старыми в несколько раз тяжелее, как я с треками вам показать попытался.

По тому, что у -120 в 2.5.5 такого не было: Если ракета ловушки в течение 5сек игнорирует, это фактически значит, что ракеты на близкой дальности (там, где ловушки нужны), только будут срываемые по радиальной скорости. В 2.5.5 в течение целого полета ракеты диполями сривались.

Can confirm.

Gryphon 33 | Maximus MiG-21

A good start would be fixing this chaff immunity for 5 seconds-bug.

Im talking about a missile reaquiring a previously notching target at just a couple hundred feet of distance. 120B will make the turn, 120C cannot. Test it yourself, start notching both versions when there are 5s left to impact, or to simplify the test, notch with no chaff. You will find 120B to hit you more often. If chaff was a bigger seperating factor, 120C would miss less often (as it should). Im not sure if extra available G but less lift of 120C or extra lift with less G on 120B make it turn better. But thats not the issue, its the memory mode chaff immunity. ECCM resistance of the 2 missiles, which previously in DCS was a massive game changer, isnt making enough of a difference now to make up for it. Will make tracks for you or Chizh if you request.