Harlikwin

LOL literally no one cares. The DCS MP, "need muh bestest jet or uber missile" mindset sucks frankly. The phoenix has been and continues to improve and be more realistic, which is what matters. And frankly the Cat is quite dangerous on most period apropos 70s/80's servers if its flown by a competent pilot at least. But you are right the days of the "I win button" are over and that probably makes some people sad. The easy "I win button" got taken away. Some people can't cope with that.

Well... Its lame, but they don't have much to work with for the SHAR. However, neither the Gr.1 and Gr.3 had a radar, and Razbam has hinted the Gr.3 might be possible. And as I recall the sooper snoot did serve in the falklands. But, per their roadmap... 1. There is still a plenty of work to do on the F15E for all ze weaponz and all ze datalinkz, and all ze new TGPs (god I hope ED actually models FLIR/IR someday that isn't terrible). 2. The Mig23 is next in the pipeline and I'm hoping its consuming lots of resources. 3. They have heavily hinted they will do the AV8B+, which would be logical since they can heavily leverage their F15 radar model for that. (ironically so could ED, but for reasons of pride IMO, they are doubling down on FC3 2.0 level radar for their modules which is a shame). 4. The Pucara, Super Taco thing, are also gonna be done at some point.

I agree. But it needs to get fleshed out more, at least for MP server owners. While you can damage systems now (or at least some of them), "clever" MP players can easily circumvent this. An easy solution would be an option to enforce the damage, i.e. you can't repair it. This would allow for less cheating, and more flexibility when trying to shoehorn certain planes into certain earlier eras in MP.

Yeah missile integration is generally really misunderstood by DCS players in general. And while the seeker may be on the missile, things like performing the search pattern were typically on the plane for most of history.

Yup, exactly. Gimme my SA-7, 14 and redeye

Honestly the best way to deal with this for ED is to include a "reliability" setting for each missile. And have mission designers/players/server owners set it how they like. And then you can have like a few failure modes, motor, seeker etc. I see 9B's with 100% reliability in MP servers and I shake my head. I also think ED should allow mission makers to disable systems on jets, this would be useful for alot of things to simulate maintenece etc, or to simulate "older jets" i.e. disable HMCS. But it should be enforceable server side. My perspective here is 100% from what the MP community has been wanting for a long time.

I've had no problems, but I'm running the older non Foveated rendering version. But the performance "improvements" for me are absolutely minor, maybe like 10FPS with DLSS.

I'm not trying to be mean about it. But honestly developing stuff for MSFS or other simulators doesn't get you much actual experience with DCS. And honestly having flown other jets in those sims they are nowhere near DCS in terms of fidelity of the jet. PLUS none of the other sims have systems like radar, IRST, weapon computers etc modeled at all or at arcade levels. So they need good system guys that actually understand that stuff in detail and can model it. Honestly the best thing to happen to DCS IMO is Razbams Galinette and his radar models for the M2k and F15. As for the experienced DCS devs, yeah 100% even those guys have issues getting stuff out. So for new devs it must be way harder, unless the jet is very simple i.e. Gen1/Gen2 jets which is IMO what most new devs should be doing for their first plane because its pretty hard to screw up a gunsight. And I mostly remember them saying it would out in like a year of the announcement, so thats really where my they bit off way more than they can chew comment came from. If this thing is out in 2025 I'll be happy and a bit surprised. With systems at a FC3 level is not really encouraging. I expect a detailed bombing computer model, detailed A/G radar, and hopefully a LANA pod that is better than the standard green-screen DCS IR stuff. Not to mention decent modeling of the "smart mutnitions" but thats at least 50% on ED.

Realistically the Cold war ended in 89, or even earlier with the polish worker strikes, the most plausible 80's scenario is in 83 i.e. Able archer. Anything really past that is pretty much fantasy. There was 0 political will to invade Europe after the early 80's. Besides there was no non nuke scenario anyway, literally every war plan known starts with multiple rounds of tac nukes all over Europe. So basically you have "early" 80's as your credible WW3 scenario. Where the early vipers are interesting is the other theatres where they fought and were used. Also, early deliveries etc don't really make it relevant, like great you have 3 birds and 2 guys that are training to fly them. Most of those later blocs were not relevant for this very simple reason.

Bless you

Yup, navy vs AF sidewinders tho. Also rails were sometimes not 100% compatible, i.e. the Aim-9G rails on British harriers had to be modified with a "file" to fit Aim9L during the falklands war as an example.

I don't even care if its modern, I just want to be a version that actually saw service.

Blk15 was exported way more tho. So its just a question of relevant how. And I mean yeah ok, 1 country got all the A/A kills.

Classis DCS development, new devs think its easy based on their non-existent prior experience, turns out waay more complicated than they think.

I mean, thats not really that unreasonable. If read about it, they were hard for fast movers to employ. One of the reasons the A10 guys got more use out of them was because usually the target was outrunning them.

An early Blk15 was the most prolific, exported, and versatile while still being old school. But I'd be fine with either at 10 or early 15. The late 15's are mfd monsters like our current Viper, don't want that.

null

So not much to debate

It wasn't very good. Most mav engagments were like 1 mile shots, if that because they could barely see anything.

Well. I'm not gonna disagree about the average DCS MP players skill issues. But it will get sorted out. Most of the better players on the CW servers already handle F5's and Mig21's decently enough, though they are in the minority. Those will be the guys that take to the F4 or 23 like ducks to water. But your average DCS 4th genner, yeah they will have a bad day.

Ah if thats the case I think I misunderstood them. One "interpolated" graph I have but don't think I can post has the 23MLA doing 14.5 dps STR at 45 sweep. It is interpolated/translated onto a western chart for comparison so I'm not sure if its correct. And if its true it "matches" what the Israelis have anecdotally said about the 23 and F4, but well, anecdotes. There is another nice one from a dutch F16A pilot that flew the MLD as well and said it outperformed the viper in BFM which is kinda eeeh, but does match what the soviets thought about it. All this being said, I think on release people will be surprised that the F4 can actually dogfight, and doubly true for the 23 since basically all of the western lore is about literally the worst first gen mig23 that ever flew, and while its somewhat accurate, its in no way accurate when discussing the ML/MLA/MLD versions. That being said I'll also say the same is likely true for optimistic assessments of how they though the 23 would fare against 4th gens. At the end of the day for DCS purposes, its all down to how well the Aero will actually get modeled, and how well the systems get modeled. Like if Jester 2.0 can pick out a gnats ass in lookdown, well thats likely a problem. Same thing if the MLA radar isn't somewhat janky but functional in lookdown. Oh one last comment I saw mentioned some issues with instability at high speed with the 23. That was a problem with early gen1 23's but it was also at high mach, like 2.0 and above. And it was solved in the 2nd gens for the most part from my understanding you can see a big difference in the vertical stab between the two.

So whats the difference between the black and red lines? And the 3/4 different graphs (is that alt?) With regards to the whole ML/MLA/MLD story. AFAIK, the ML manual is an early one, and it was revised for MLA with better data, also various things like G limits got upped between each one of those iterations, partly due to some changes in the airframes, but also from experience. From what I have anecdotally heard the 33 degree wing sweep got you like ~1-2 DPS more than the 45. Same thing for stuff like AOA limits as well. At any rate, that more or less means the F4 and 23 are relatively close performance wise for STR and ITR. Which is what RL testing from Israel anecdotally said (though they said their MLA/MLD (aerodynamically supposedly an MLA) the 23 outdid their F4. Also for all the GCI guys, while ofc the Soviets had GCI and used it doctrinally, they were basically horrified by how badly the Mid East air forces performed and basically setup their own version of Top-Gun, to teach BFM out in Khazakstan in the 70's. So more or less an analog to the US Vietnam experience. And by the early 80's you had experienced mig-23 pilots beating rookie mig29 pilots there, just like early on F15's got beat by F4's or 104's in DACT.

Yeah, but sadly not happening due to DL issues.

I hear ya. Also glad the radars on the modern jets are getting reworked to be more in line with the F15E radar model.

Yeah I get that you guys needed MT to do better cloud modeling or to have them exist in the game beyond just being a graphical shader layer. And that latest radar thing sort of hints that radar may be effected by weather so I'm hoping for progress.