MiG 21 vs modern fighters

[GGTharos]

So what you're saying is stop playing DCS .It's not realistic.

 

I'm saying it needs some fixing.

 

Of course they achieved something .Even if the mig 21 is more capable than it should they won vs a far more capable fighter in DCS and that's hard to do in my view.

 

That's incorrect. Doe to how things are modeled, huge amount of capability is sapped away from certain aircraft. Notice how everyone is pushed to 'play in the mountains'. That's actually unnatural for a modern fighter, and it's happening because of the above reason. The moment you go play in the environment, things become a complete turkey-shoot, as it should be - but at the same time, some of the turkeys are carrying sniper rifles instead of sling-shots.

Edited March 10, 2015 by GGTharos

[Einherjer]

Interesting - where is my popcorn?

[Sleksa]

No, because these missiles can be modeled correctly. Realism is a priority for the DCS title, and should be taking a back-seat to 'fun'.

 

If you believe for a moment that you did something great by using a MiG-21 to shoot down a 'modern' fighter, let me divest you of that delusion right now:

 

 

- You have a radar that will lock onto a modern jamming fighter. Your chances of doing that should actually be nil.

- You can get within 5nm of a slammer platform AND avoid the slammer. Your chances of doing that should also be nil.

- Ditto for Sparrow and consequently R-27.

- You have missiles whose speed, range, g capability and gimbals are far wider than they ought to be. They also don't lose speed in turns because they're using the old FM.

 

On the other hand, you're up against 'superior' platforms that:

- Lose target track easily despite what should really be happening

- Carry missiles that peter out past 5nm

- Carry missiles whose maneuverability is equivalent to late vietnam era capability, and not that of a modern missile

- Carry missiles that lack any type of memory function that they ought to have

 

 

To put in another way, your 'ground sniffing ways' should be ended by one of those aircraft shooting a missile down from 10000m, negating any terrain cover and there should be next to nothing you could do about it, except hope to correctly jump in the notch and cower in it.

 

This isn't the case currently. And no, you shouldn't get what you have now for 'fun', not when 'realism' is supposed to be a staple of DCS.

 

If you truly believed what you said about the realism being the #1 priority, you wouldn't even be discussing about modern fighters as currently there are none available in DCS.

 

Instead, what we have is a couple of planes that can take to the sky by pressing 2 buttons (L & R engines on, don't even need power) with as much depth and complexity as the fighters in the battlefield game series.

 

This coupled with the fact that the F-15, while being the most simplistic, is also by far the most powerful pilotable plane in the game skewes the online experience into stale homogenuity where nobody wants to get into a combination of massive artificial (simplicity) and realistic (radar+amraams) disadvantage. This is quite plain to see by recording a few hours of gameplay on the popular player vs player servers such as 104'th, with the vast majority of fighter planes being F-15's.

 

In this regard and strictly in the context of the DCS itself, the mig-21 player who manages to kill a modern fighter in a online environment is not delusional (and I can't imagine why you'd ever take such a hostile stance) but rather simply more skilled, either mechanically (faster radar locking, notching etc) or knowledge wise (better emission discipline, better decisionmaking on for example when to run and when to fight) or both.

 

From the same perspective, the missile performance that you argue gives the mig-21 an unfair edge is in my opinion a completely moot point as every single aspect about every single modern fighter in the game is closer to playing an aerial version of quake instead of a aerial combat simulator.

[JorgeIII]

Realism is a priority for the DCS title, and should be taking a back-seat to 'fun'.

 

If you believe for a moment that you did something great by using a MiG-21 to shoot down a 'modern' fighter, let me divest you of that delusion right now:...

 

 

What happened, you got shot by a Mig-21? :smilewink:

Edited March 10, 2015 by JorgeIII

[tsb47]

No, because these missiles can be modeled correctly. Realism is a priority for the DCS title, and should be taking a back-seat to 'fun'.

 

If you believe for a moment that you did something great by using a MiG-21 to shoot down a 'modern' fighter, let me divest you of that delusion right now:

 

- You have a radar that will lock onto a modern jamming fighter. Your chances of doing that should actually be nil.

- You can get within 5nm of a slammer platform AND avoid the slammer. Your chances of doing that should also be nil.

- Ditto for Sparrow and consequently R-27.

- You have missiles whose speed, range, g capability and gimbals are far wider than they ought to be. They also don't lose speed in turns because they're using the old FM.

 

On the other hand, you're up against 'superior' platforms that:

- Lose target track easily despite what should really be happening

- Carry missiles that peter out past 5nm

- Carry missiles whose maneuverability is equivalent to late vietnam era capability, and not that of a modern missile

- Carry missiles that lack any type of memory function that they ought to have

 

 

To put in another way, your 'ground sniffing ways' should be ended by one of those aircraft shooting a missile down from 10000m, negating any terrain cover and there should be next to nothing you could do about it, except hope to correctly jump in the notch and cower in it.

 

This isn't the case currently. And no, you shouldn't get what you have now for 'fun', not when 'realism' is supposed to be a staple of DCS.

 

Wow, way to kill the party...

 

...someone (not naming names) got shot down by a Mig-21 methinks.

[Ragnarok]

All these people cry for "realism" but have little clue what that actually means...

When you lose a fight on the server, you lose your license and you get a blue screen on the computer? :lol:

It would be interesting to see how the pilots flying and fight :music_whistling::megalol:

[GGTharos]

No, but I did watch them fly up to within 5nm head-on and dodge 120's. Note that I never said that's their fault.

 

What happened, you got shot by a Mig-21? :smilewink:

[GGTharos]

This coupled with the fact that the F-15, while being the most simplistic, is also by far the most powerful pilotable plane in the game skewes the online experience into stale homogenuity where nobody wants to get into a combination of massive artificial (simplicity) and realistic (radar+amraams) disadvantage. This is quite plain to see by recording a few hours of gameplay on the popular player vs player servers such as 104'th, with the vast majority of fighter planes being F-15's.

 

 

You know, what's really funny is that a properly modeled F-15 at a DCS level, would be just as easy to operate as the FC3 one, and it would be far deadlier.

 

Your argument seems to hinge on the buttonpushing part, but the fact is that these aircraft gain their advantage through automation. Better automation of their onboard systems, better automation of the missiles, better/more information for all those things to process.

 

In this regard and strictly in the context of the DCS itself, the mig-21 player who manages to kill a modern fighter in a online environment is not delusional (and I can't imagine why you'd ever take such a hostile stance) but rather simply more skilled, either mechanically (faster radar locking, notching etc) or knowledge wise (better emission discipline, better decisionmaking on for example when to run and when to fight) or both.

 

Thanks for reading what I wrote, only not! I said the sense of a 'great accomplishment' is the delusion. I also explain why.

 

From the same perspective, the missile performance that you argue gives the mig-21 an unfair edge is in my opinion a completely moot point as every single aspect about every single modern fighter in the game is closer to playing an aerial version of quake instead of a aerial combat simulator.

 

Yeah, so let's airquake the MiG-21 as well, why not, right? It isn't moot. Aircraft should have their differences properly simulated, within the constraints of the simulator. And in this case, this is very doable for the MiG-21.

[Frostie]

From the same perspective, the missile performance that you argue gives the mig-21 an unfair edge is in my opinion a completely moot point as every single aspect about every single modern fighter in the game is closer to playing an aerial version of quake instead of a aerial combat simulator.

You can airquake in a Mig-21 just as much as any FC3 aircraft, I think you don't understand how simple air combat is, you're rather confusing it with start up procedures and flipping switches.

 

 

 

Regardless of how over done the MiG-21s missiles currently are and how weak the modern fighters are in comparison to their real life counterparts making kills against aircraft armed with much more powerful radars and weapons is a tall order and one that deserves appreciation.

 

I pride myself on being aware of my surroundings in PvP, but the other day I got bounced on by a MiG-21 head on for the first time that i'm aware of tangling with one, a huge surprise to see a weak radar source firing at me from what I thought must be 100+km, it took a moment to realise this must be a Mig-21 so I took immediate defensive to the floor and extended, turned a hill and picked him up with EOS as he was beaming towards the mountains. The R-27ET impact must have scared the crap out of him. Even so for the 21 to get into such positions and find targets takes a lot of cunning but the reality is if you're doing this a lot and dying whilst getting the odd kill I should imagine that is the law of averages, but doing this and surviving flight after flight, now that would be something special.

[kmstewart64]

Call me delusional if you must, but I still get a kick in the pants when I shoot anything down with the Mig 21. Unrealistic? Maybe so, but in the DCS World the Mig 21 is still at a disadvantage and in my little world I'm having fun with it!

 

MORG

[tsb47]

Call me delusional if you must, but I still get a kick in the pants when I shoot anything down with the Mig 21. Unrealistic? Maybe so, but in the DCS World the Mig 21 is still at a disadvantage and in my little world I'm having fun with it!

 

MORG

 

Agreed.

 

What's unrealistic is flying online servers where you're in a Mig-21bis with no GCI support, you're outnumbered 2:1 by enemy F-15Cs, Su-27s or Su-33s and all ground opponents are next-gen missile batteries.

 

Even assuming the Mig-21bis has one or two 'unrealistically' powerful missiles and opponents missiles are nerfed (which has NOT been my experience, as I get consistently blown out of the sky while dumping chaff and beaming AIM-120Cs that impact less than 4 seconds after RWR gives me a lock warning) there is still a major balance issue.

 

IMHO anyone in a Mig-21bis who takes out an F-15C etc deserves a huge hat-tip. And anyone saying they don't deserve the credit is Scrooge McDuck on steroids.

[JorgeIII]

Its kind of funny to read post from people who "fly" FC level planes talking about realism.

There is no point in comparing FC with DCS modules, they are clearly build with a different standard and aimed at a different public.

 

Someone who gets on a DCS - MIG 21 in the 104th server has balls and is probably inclined to strategy, patiency, realistic flying and navigation and will most likely show a mature and respectful behavior. Within FC level players you will probably find the opposite characteristics..

Edited March 10, 2015 by JorgeIII

[Frostie]

Its kind of funny to read post from people who "fly" FC level planes talking about realism.

There is no point in comparing FC with DCS modules, they are clearly build with a different standard and aimed at a different public.

 

Someone who gets on a DCS - MIG 21 in the 104th server has balls and is probably inclined to strategy, patiency, realistic flying and navigation and will most likely show a mature and respectful behavior. Within FC level players you will probably find the opposite characteristics..

Sorry but the only funny thing here is the idea that jumping into a cockpit with flickable switches suddenly means you fly realistically. Not to mention the whimsical presumptions. ;)

[TAW_Blaze]

It's kind of funny to read people arguing over air combat while they have no clue about it.

 

If you think the complexity of air combat is a matter of having functional switches in the jet and FC fighters don't require a high level of knowledge to efficiently use in A2A combat then you should just go back to your A-10 and keep flicking them switches.

 

Seriously this thread is just flat out hilarious lately.

[EngineerFalcon]

Its kind of funny to read post from people who "fly" FC level planes talking about realism.

There is no point in comparing FC with DCS modules, they are clearly build with a different standard and aimed at a different public.

 

Someone who gets on a DCS - MIG 21 in the 104th server has balls and is probably inclined to strategy, patiency, realistic flying and navigation and will most likely show a mature and respectful behavior. Within FC level players you will probably find the opposite characteristics..

 

See ? That's why people think the DCS community is presumptuous.

 

Tell me, IL-2 1946 has no clickable cockpits, so it is more or less FC3 level.

Now would you dare say to all the people who played that sim over ten years that they have no knowledge of air combat and navigation because they are not flying DCS P-51 ?

FC3 players may have less buttons to click, but the tactics and skills involved are the exact same as for the MiG-21. And, ironically, this kind of "I'm over everyone else because I flip switches" attitude is a good way to get killed online.

[Hadwell]

I only say FC3 planes because all the other fighters with radar guided missiles are FC3 planes.

 

nothing to do with switches or simplifications.

[Sleksa]

You know, what's really funny is that a properly modeled F-15 at a DCS level, would be just as easy to operate as the FC3 one, and it would be far deadlier.

 

Your argument seems to hinge on the buttonpushing part, but the fact is that these aircraft gain their advantage through automation. Better automation of their onboard systems, better automation of the missiles, better/more information for all those things to process.

 

 

 

Thanks for reading what I wrote, only not! I said the sense of a 'great accomplishment' is the delusion. I also explain why.

 

 

 

Yeah, so let's airquake the MiG-21 as well, why not, right? It isn't moot. Aircraft should have their differences properly simulated, within the constraints of the simulator. And in this case, this is very doable for the MiG-21.

 

 

The question and my argument is not simply about some button pushing, but I can see why you'd rather single a easy interpretation of the whole argument and argue against it, rather than the whole point itself as this seems like a very emotional topic.

 

The point I was making is not about whether a plane has buttons you can click on in the cockpit, but rather the mix of simplification and high fidelity in one setting. The aerial Quake argument might've been too provocative, I admit, but I doubt you can say with a straight face that the the current F-15 we have is at sufficiently high level of fidelity, comparable to aircraft like the mig-21 or a-10, and you can't deny the fact that it gives the pilot of a simpler aircraft an advantage (the extent of which can be argued to infinity) due to the reduced need to focus on flying the plane itself, no matter how automated the majority of processes are on the real thing.

 

I'll state it again more clearly. I understand that the Mig-21 is older and inferior to the F-15, but that's not what's eating me, it's the above-mentioned advantage gained from simplifying the aircraft, no matter what level of automation the plane has, all the while belittling the achievements of the underdog by turning a blind eye to the FC3 aircraft's advantages and focusing on a single aspect of the mig-21 that may or may not be working better than it should be (I'm not an expert and I've seen no documentation one way or another on the performance, but would love to see if there is any).

 

As for the R-3R, if it is performing too well, I'd warmly welcome an adjustment to make it behave more like the real life one, just as I'd warmly welcome a more close-to-reality F-15, or ECM modelling, a more thorough mission editor (patrolling waypoints as a example), weapon damage modeling and so on and so on.

 

The fact is though, that this is a really tiny market with a extremely demanding playerbase, with more projects being cancelled than finished. In this regard I'm completely fine with having minor issues such as the missile's performance (and even more fine with them being adjusted closer to reality provided it doesn't provide excessive workload on the developing team), when I zoom out of the missile and focus on the whole package that we have with a extensive list of weaponry, radio/navigation systems and even the radar and it's various operating modes, coolants and so on. All that is where the future of DCS lies to me, with a seemingly promising start of the 2016 with the tomcats, eurofighters, mirages and other planes hopefully gradually overtaking the legacy touch 'n go fighters from flaming cliffs.

 

And even then I'll still share tsb47's sentiment and applaud any mig that bags up a fancier fighter, and call anyone claiming it was only due to some missile's flight mechanics being different from the real life a, genuine scrooge mcduck :pilotfly:

[tsb47]

Here here!

[GGTharos]

The question and my argument is not simply about some button pushing, but I can see why you'd rather single a easy interpretation of the whole argument and argue against it, rather than the whole point itself as this seems like a very emotional topic.

 

I think your point was off the mark.

 

The point I was making is not about whether a plane has buttons you can click on in the cockpit, but rather the mix of simplification and high fidelity in one setting.

... and it's largely irrelevant, because DCS aircraft and FC aircraft can mix as long as the combat workload is accurately modeled for each one.

 

The aerial Quake argument might've been too provocative, I admit, but I doubt you can say with a straight face that the the current F-15 we have is at sufficiently high level of fidelity, comparable to aircraft like the mig-21 or a-10, and you can't deny the fact that it gives the pilot of a simpler aircraft an advantage (the extent of which can be argued to infinity) due to the reduced need to focus on flying the plane itself, no matter how automated the majority of processes are on the real thing.

Actually yes I can, and easily. The difference in operating a DCS F-15 vs. an FC3 F-15 in combat would be that the DCS version would be easier and deadlier. I think that sentence where you dismiss automation is one huge joke, but let's get down to specific examples, and I'll stick to MiG-21s and F-15's for simplicity's sake:

 

Both have a fairly advanced model, but:

- The F-15 has an augmentation system designed to make it easier to fly so that you can focus less on the flying the plane itself. In FC3 there are some implementation issues that make the F-15 harder to fly than it ought to be in the transsonic and high-AoA regimes.

- The MiG-21 doesn't appear to have such issues, but I could be wrong

 

So here, the effect is a completely realistic difference in 'focusing on flying' - if you were complaining about a Su-33 or MiG-29, ok, maybe I'd have to agree because they're SFM. But not with any of the other aircraft.

 

I'll state it again more clearly. I understand that the Mig-21 is older and inferior to the F-15, but that's not what's eating me, it's the above-mentioned advantage gained from simplifying the aircraft, no matter what level of automation the plane has, all the while belittling the achievements of the underdog by turning a blind eye to the FC3 aircraft's advantages and focusing on a single aspect of the mig-21 that may or may not be working better than it should be (I'm not an expert and I've seen no documentation one way or another on the performance, but would love to see if there is any).

What's eating you is eating you because you don't know. The simplifications actually make those FC3 aircraft more difficult to operate, not easier - why? Because they lack the automation that the real aircraft has. There's plenty of documentation, but it often costs money. Suffice it to say, a real F-15 radar doesn't need to be told to lock you in some cases, even in certain search modes. It also won't drop you just because you squaked through the notch.

 

In other words, the real engagement sequence, barring stuff like VID/EID which we don't do in EITHER aircraft in the game (save for someone maybe having to push an IFF button) for the F-15 is: Designate, verify parameters and shoot. Yep! That's all there is to it in RL, and everything you need to achieve it is on the HOTAS, much like in the FC3 simulation. The procedure is complicated by other things (mainly ID, flying in a team, external data sources, ROEs etc), but none of those things are simulated in a game, including your MiG-21.

 

 

As for the R-3R, if it is performing too well, I'd warmly welcome an adjustment to make it behave more like the real life one, just as I'd warmly welcome a more close-to-reality F-15, or ECM modelling, a more thorough mission editor (patrolling waypoints as a example), weapon damage modeling and so on and so on.

We all would.

 

And even then I'll still share tsb47's sentiment and applaud any mig that bags up a fancier fighter, and call anyone claiming it was only due to some missile's flight mechanics being different from the real life a, genuine scrooge mcduck :pilotfly:

And you're both wrong - you're flat out making a claim that would be equivalent to saying that sniping with a pistol in an FPS is quite an achievement because you hit some pixel at 500m with that 9mm. But the fact is that this round shouldn't even have reached that distance. Yep, you have some disadvantage compared to the sniper rifle, but you did something that you should have never been able to ... and you can repeat it over and over.

 

If you get more realistic missiles, then you'll understand the whole thing pretty much straight away.

Edited March 11, 2015 by GGTharos

[tsb47]

And you're both wrong - you're flat out making a claim that would be equivalent to saying that sniping with a pistol in an FPS is quite an achievement because you hit some pixel at 500m with that 9mm. But the fact is that this round shouldn't even have reached that distance. Yep, you have some disadvantage compared to the sniper rifle, but you did something that you should have never been able to ... and you can repeat it over and over.

 

Steady on. We're not claiming it's realistic. We're claiming it's difficult and therefore the people who manage to do it deserve credit. Check your ADI.

[GGTharos]

My ADI's just fine. I didn't say people don't deserve credit, just that they're claiming more than they earn :)

 

Steady on. We're not claiming it's realistic. We're claiming it's difficult and therefore the people who manage to do it deserve credit. Check your ADI.

[tsb47]

When you've been AIM-120C'd as many times as I have, you'll claim all the credit you can get for that one kill... and more.

[JorgeIII]

Try no to respond GGTharos provocations (it does really look like he got some hits from 21's). Lets stay on topic and keep this nice thread going.

 

There is a FC section in the forum where FC "realism" can be discussed. And theres a MIG-21 bugs section where bugs or errors about missiles can be reported.

 

(By the way you cant even calibrate the ADI in a FC level aircraft)

Edited March 11, 2015 by JorgeIII

[TAW_Blaze]

You accuse others of provocation from your high horse spewing shit on people because their aircraft don't have a clickable cockpit. The hypocrisy is ****ing real here.

 

It's brilliant how some people think they are superior because they managed to learn some sequence of switch operation.

[EngineerFalcon]

Try no to respond GGTharos provocations

he got some hits from 21's.

FC "realism" can be discussed.

 

I am literally speechless.

 

Someone comes here to inform you of your misunderstanding of "simplicity" and your answer is to say they are provoking you because they are jealous ?

 

Wow.