MiG 21 vs modern fighters

[Hadwell]

Even if clickable cockpits weren't a thing...

 

anyone who's got problems with the mig-21, try flying it a few weeks, JUST the mig-21 on the 104th server.

 

then come back and say its anywhere near as easy as an fc3 plane to get kills with, with any missile. (other than against a-10s and su-25s.)

 

if you're just gonna be a hypocrite, and say the mig-21 is too easy, without even giving it a good respectable try online, multiplayer on a populated server against randoms in non set-up and non staged situations, then that's all you are.

 

maybe post some youtube videos or something to prove that you've actually gone out of your way to prove your point.

 

and all this about fun or whatever, maybe it's emotional, whatever you want to take it as, this is just an internet airplanes game, no matter how emotional or serious we are, it's not really THAT big of a deal, and I find this kinda fun.

 

also there are forum posts about modern fighters and posts specifically about the mig-21, but comparing mig-21 weapons to modern fighter weapons is, in my mind, appropriate for this thread.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Hadwell

[TAW_Blaze]

You're not even close to understanding the problem.

 

The 21 is difficult to fly because it's a different generation aircraft than the others. Therefore it isn't supposed to be an equal opponent to them.

 

IT IS NOT DIFFICULT TO FLY BECAUSE IT HAS A CLICKABLE COCKPIT AND FULLY SIMULATED SYSTEMS.

 

What you condescending clueless people do not understand that a fully simulated Eagle will be far easier to use compared to an FC level jet given the fact

 

1) you understand the concepts that work behind the systems

 

2) you have read the manual and acquired the subconscious knowledge of what button push does what. But that just goes like this: I figure out what I want to do, and I'll figure out what combination of user input it takes to do it. None different to what you have to do in FC jets currently, except some actions not representing IRL procedures.

 

Currently the FC level simulation adds a lot of holes in the system that cause a lot of trouble throughout it's operation. There are many situations where you would have the fraction of the present workload with a fully simulated radar for instance. I could go on and on about this, but I'm just gonna name a few key features that are missing:

 

- TWS memory

- AMRAAM guiding to last known intercept point in case bug/lock is lost

- APG-63 subsearch modes

- missing RWR features

- laughable ECM modeling (with proper ECM modeling, your little 21 will have a hard time ever keeping lock on an Eagle, just like GG said)

 

On the other hand there's very little benefit from the simplifications. IIRC the only real positive inaccuracy is that TWS scans a slightly larger area than it should, but this is mostly insignificant. Having a wider azimuth and elevation is most important when you're trying to attack multiple targets at the same time, but the chances of being in lethal firing position against 2 or more competent bandits strongly converge to zero.

[Hadwell]

and what nobody seems to understand is... every plane flies differently, doesn't matter the plane, one will be easier to use than the other, just based on what it is, not its technology, not what buttons you gotta press...

 

until you actually go out and try it for yourself, I mean really put some effort in, you can't say.

 

and the mig-21 only has a 30km max radar range, I'm sure that's why it can always bypass the ecm.

 

in fact, if someone with ecm on is outside the 30km max range, in the radar cone, and i have the continues mode thing off, i get the vertical fuzzy line thing, so i can sorta pick up contacts more than 30km away, though i haven't figured out how much further.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Hadwell

[TAW_Blaze]

and what nobody seems to understand is... every plane flies differently, doesn't matter the plane, one will be easier to use than the other, just based on what it is, not its technology, not what buttons you gotta press...

 

Available technology and designer goals determine how a system will work. They fly and operate differently because they are engineered differently and incorporate different technology.

 

until you actually go out and try it for yourself, I mean really put some effort in, you can't say.

 

Not really. I don't need to go and try myself to see that flying a different aircraft will be more difficult than to fly the one I'm used to. The point is, this superiority complex about having fully simulated systems is just blatantly retarded. As I said, it isn't more difficult because you have to click things.

 

and the mig-21 only has a 30km max radar range, I'm sure that's why it can always bypass the ecm.

 

That's not how this works, that's not how any of this works.

[Hadwell]

well i don't think there's any plane that the ecm still works on at 30km... i'll have to pay more attention next time i fly something with more than a 30km radar range...

 

doesn't matter if it's how it works in real life, this is DCS.

[TAW_Blaze]

well i don't think there's any plane that the ecm still works on at 30km... i'll have to pay more attention next time i fly something with more than a 30km radar range...

 

doesn't matter if it's how it works in real life, this is DCS.

 

:megalol:

 

How can it not matter? DCS is a hardcore simulator. A simulator is supposed to represent real life behaviour, isn't it?

 

Do you even think about what you're writing, or you just contradict yourself by default?

[Hadwell]

no I'm saying this thread is more about how dcs currently is, and not so much what people wish it were.

 

it's fine to compare mig-21 weapons to modern fighter weapons, but to complain about how they should be doesn't help anyone learn how to use them as they are in DCS.

[Sleksa]

:megalol:

 

How can it not matter? DCS is a hardcore simulator. A simulator is supposed to represent real life behaviour, isn't it?

 

 

DCS might be the best aerial combat simulator there is on the market, but that doesn't mean that everything inside it is representing real life. From the very basics such as ATC communications, things are massively simplified or outright wrong. Other fine examples include things like a solitary A-10A jamming every single fighter's radar inside a 300+ KM radius while sitting squarely on the runway, ARMs not needing different seeker-heads against different threats, ECM in general affecting every single system, outdated or state of the art at the same flat value, missile performances, weather conditions, effectiveness of Flares being a constant value over all IR seeking missiles and so on.

 

The ideal state of DCS is to represent the real life as close as possible, but only extremely limited amount of things currently inside DCS are close to this level. And singling out the mig-21 due to it's R-3R missile's performance (and again, I haven't seen any documentation towards any side of the argument) is a rather negative stance to take, especially when the mig-21 as a whole product/package is spectacularily close to the real thing.

 

And again I'm not arguing that learning some button flicking sequences makes the mig pilot somehow better from the rest of the people, but rather that it's silly to single out the mig pilot as having an unfair advantage when every plane in the game enjoys the same advantages at varying degrees (except, seemingly the F-15)

Edited March 11, 2015 by Sleksa

[OnlyforDCS]

no I'm saying this thread is more about how dcs currently is, and not so much what people wish it were.

 

it's fine to compare mig-21 weapons to modern fighter weapons, but to complain about how they should be doesn't help anyone learn how to use them as they are in DCS.

 

Well said. It's time to turn down the hostility in this thread down a notch or two.

 

This thread is about learning to fly and use the Mig online, in the current DCS environment, at least that is my understanding of the thread. No one is arguing that more realism would be a bad thing, but we cant shut our eyes and pretend the problems away. They exist and we have to work with what's at hand.

[TAW_Blaze]

no I'm saying this thread is more about how dcs currently is, and not so much what people wish it were.

 

it's fine to compare mig-21 weapons to modern fighter weapons, but to complain about how they should be doesn't help anyone learn how to use them as they are in DCS.

 

DCS might be the best aerial combat simulator there is on the market, but that doesn't mean that everything inside it is representing real life. From the very basics such as ATC communications, things are massively simplified or outright wrong. Other fine examples include things like a solitary A-10A jamming every single fighter's radar inside a 300+ KM radius while sitting squarely on the runway, ARMs not needing different seeker-heads against different threats, ECM in general affecting every single system, outdated or state of the art at the same flat value, missile performances, weather conditions, effectiveness of Flares being a constant value over all IR seeking missiles and so on.

 

The ideal state of DCS is to represent the real life as close as possible, but only extremely limited amount of things currently inside DCS are close to this level. And singling out the mig-21 due to it's R-3R missile's performance (and again, I haven't seen any documentation towards any side of the argument) is a rather negative stance to take, especially when the mig-21 as a whole product/package is spectacularily close to the real thing.

 

And again I'm not arguing that learning some button flicking sequences makes the mig pilot somehow better from the rest of the people, but rather that it's silly to single out the mig pilot as having an unfair advantage when every plane in the game enjoys the same advantages at varying degrees (except, seemingly the F-15)

 

The point is you can't argue against realism because of current states that exist in the game.

 

We're all really ****ing tired of this neverending circlejerk of "I have it harder than you". You picked to fly a certain plane, nobody forced it on you. If it's inferior to some others, then deal with it.

 

I'm not afraid to push into certain fights where my Eagle is inferior to others (WVR for instance), yet you don't see me yelling that the Flanker is unfair and OP if I do get shot down.

 

Since some of you are doing this retarded circlejerk all over again there isn't much left to do than to show you how the current state of the game is highly favorable for you (relatively), despite all of your claims of unfairness and whatnot. It is unfair, but it should be far more unfair.

 

I'm not against discussing how to fight unfair fights and how to improve at it, but when some guy comes here and starts shoving bullshit in my face then I probably won't take it without a response.

[tsb47]

well i don't think there's any plane that the ecm still works on at 30km... i'll have to pay more attention next time i fly something with more than a 30km radar range...

 

doesn't matter if it's how it works in real life, this is DCS.

 

I gotta back Hadwell on this. He's all sense. Mig-21bis is hard to fly and harder to get kills in. Props to him for doing it.

 

No-one is saying we're better than others for flying an ASM aircraft (although I would suggest it is more 'fun' if you are technically inclined and a better 'simulation' in the flight sim nerd sense of the word).

 

We are just saying you have to respect the skills of any pilot that can get kills in a DCS Mig-21bis against a DCS F-15C, Su-27 or Su-33 because it is really, really, really hard. That is true regardless of how 'realistic' the DCS simulation is.

 

And who are we to judge how realistic the simulation is anyway? I have certainly never flown a fighter aircraft, let alone on a combat sortie. Has anyone here?

[Einherjer]

It's hard to archive similar results in an MiG -21 as in an F -15, it's also hard to be as effective as an A-10 in air to ground, but that's the fun of it I think, you don't have a tgp or a working ECM pot nor a good RWR - but that's no problem - it's a challenge, and fun

[Sleksa]

The point is you can't argue against realism because of current states that exist in the game.

 

We're all really ****ing tired of this neverending circlejerk of "I have it harder than you". You picked to fly a certain plane, nobody forced it on you. If it's inferior to some others, then deal with it.

 

I'm not afraid to push into certain fights where my Eagle is inferior to others (WVR for instance), yet you don't see me yelling that the Flanker is unfair and OP if I do get shot down.

 

Since some of you are doing this retarded circlejerk all over again there isn't much left to do than to show you how the current state of the game is highly favorable for you (relatively), despite all of your claims of unfairness and whatnot. It is unfair, but it should be far more unfair.

 

I'm not against discussing how to fight unfair fights and how to improve at it, but when some guy comes here and starts shoving bullshit in my face then I probably won't take it without a response.

 

 

I think you've let your emotions get ahead of your reading comprehension.

 

I've stated several times that I'm completely fine with the mig-21 being at a distinct disadvantage against the likes of F-15. I'm also completely fine with getting shot down while flying it. I'm also fine with the fight being even tougher if that's how it would be in the real world. It's obviously the nature of things when a older interceptor is going up against a newer air superiority fighter. I'm also by no means excluding my flying to the mig alone (but thanks for the condescending assumptions), dedicating a portion of my flight time to the FC3 aircraft, some to helicopters, some to ground attackers and some to the mig. I have no personal investment on the subject and I'm fine with whatever they do with the mig's weapons (including leaving it as it is, as currently there's likely several bigger things LNS should direct their focus on such as the mig digging itself into the runway).

 

What I'm not fine with is a Buzz Killington coming in to say the overall effort to score a kill on the mig is nullified because one of it's weapon is flying with incorrect parameters. The mig might enjoy some unfair/unrealistic advantage of the R-3 missile performing better than it's real life counterpart, I agree, but when you look at the overall process, firing the weapon and having it travel to the target is only a part of the overall process of shooting down your opponent. Even if you discredit the entire part about the weapon traveling to the target, in the event that the mig pilot does score a kill on a fc3 aircraft, the pilot's capacity to pull every other aspect of the flight including avoiding the enemy, maneuvering into position and acquiring the target on a (again, rightfully) inferior platform deserve some form of a thumbs up as he's gotten into a advantageous position by starting at a disadvantageous initial condition.

[TAW_Blaze]

I think you've let your emotions get ahead of your reading comprehension.

 

I've stated several times that I'm completely fine with the mig-21 being at a distinct disadvantage against the likes of F-15. I'm also completely fine with getting shot down while flying it. I'm also fine with the fight being even tougher if that's how it would be in the real world. It's obviously the nature of things when a older interceptor is going up against a newer air superiority fighter. I'm also by no means excluding my flying to the mig alone (but thanks for the condescending assumptions), dedicating a portion of my flight time to the FC3 aircraft, some to helicopters, some to ground attackers and some to the mig. I have no personal investment on the subject and I'm fine with whatever they do with the mig's weapons (including leaving it as it is, as currently there's likely several bigger things LNS should direct their focus on such as the mig digging itself into the runway).

 

What I'm not fine with is a Buzz Killington coming in to say the overall effort to score a kill on the mig is nullified because one of it's weapon is flying with incorrect parameters. The mig might enjoy some unfair/unrealistic advantage of the R-3 missile performing better than it's real life counterpart, I agree, but when you look at the overall process, firing the weapon and having it travel to the target is only a part of the overall process of shooting down your opponent. Even if you discredit the entire part about the weapon traveling to the target, in the event that the mig pilot does score a kill on a fc3 aircraft, the pilot's capacity to pull every other aspect of the flight including avoiding the enemy, maneuvering into position and acquiring the target on a (again, rightfully) inferior platform deserve some form of a thumbs up as he's gotten into a advantageous position by starting at a disadvantageous initial condition.

 

I'd say your typing skills got ahead of your comprehension. I didn't point specifically at you, but rather at some people in the thread. Read back a few pages and you'll see people claiming A2A combat difficulty is a matter of having switches to click and desperately trying to prove that flying FC aircraft requires no knowledge.

[Hadwell]

Well really, once you get the mig-21 started up, and all your switches set, it's just as many buttons as on the fc3 planes, but its easier to type fc3 planes than modern fighters or su-27/33 mig-29 and f-15....

 

im sorry if that keeps confusing people im trying to explain that...

 

the fc3 planes are easier to get into, cause you don't have to learn start-up, but once you're in the air, it's pretty similar, most of my controls are the same for the su-27 as they are for the mig-21...

 

I went for a more universal key config, i found all the things that all the planes had in common, and used the same buttons for all the planes in the game, grouped into systems... everything radar related is left thumb, etc... that way if one plane had a feature for the radar that another didn't, i could easily find it, cause i knew it would be in the radar section of my controller.

 

that way, I only need to memorize one set of controls, and I can fly all the planes in the game.

 

A-10C being the exception.

 

the nice thing about the x-55, too many buttons, not enough things to map them to.

 

though if someone doesn't like that i have a static set of controls, and unfortunately, their not in the same physical positions as they are in the mig-21, neither are they in fc3, so i might as well only have one config for all.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Hadwell

[Frostie]

To be truthful the MiG radar is easier and simpler to operate than the FC3 fighter radars, though obviously the more complex FC3 radars can do so much more. Personally I'd say getting kills in an Su25 against F-15s is the toughest aircraft mission in DCS.

[Hadwell]

To be truthful the MiG radar is easier and simpler to operate than the FC3 fighter radars, though obviously the more complex FC3 radars can do so much more. Personally I'd say getting kills in an Su25 against F-15s is the toughest aircraft mission in DCS.

 

F-86?

http://i.imgur.com/MJnRBm2.webm

[Pikey]

Unsurprisingly this was a pointless thread mixing up PvP with a Simulator of Real Life, or three separate viewpoints.

 

Some people had some personal viewpoints to share and were shouted down with an argument from another viewpoint.

 

There's too much "If" as well to be a worthwhile debate. Let's leave opinion to be just that and focus on DCS the simulator rather than DCS the PvP sandbox. DCS isn't well suited to fair PvP for the same reasons that war and conflict in the real world are fair and balanced.

 

Play nicely.

[Sleksa]

To be truthful the MiG radar is easier and simpler to operate than the FC3 fighter radars, though obviously the more complex FC3 radars can do so much more. Personally I'd say getting kills in an Su25 against F-15s is the toughest aircraft mission in DCS.

 

To some extent the complexity and even the difficulty can also be influenced by the user with more or less community-approved ways. Things such as exporting the radar/rwr viewport are pretty much a standard, but I bet many would get their jimmies rustled if they knew that the pilot that shot them down was using a AHK script which would turn the radar on for a few seconds to scan the entire radar cone in tws mode systematically while keying the lock button with a sleep timer of a couple of milliseconds.

 

The mig's radar itself would in my opinion be the second strongest radar in dcs for the simple reason of being able to perform IFF at ECM'd targets. If the radar would be longer ranged, it'd be a pretty strong wingman for a eagle/flanker for this capacity alone, as nearly all of the popular player vs player servers seem to be built upon a principle of drawing a bullseye in the middle between the red/blue airfields, with the majority of players flying straight towards a wall of ecm noise originating from the people who turn their jamming on as a part of the takeoff procedure.

[Hadwell]

...with the majority of players flying straight towards a wall of ecm noise originating from the people who turn their jamming on as a part of the takeoff procedure.

 

my hud looks like the matrix.

 

[tsb47]

Unsurprisingly this was a pointless thread mixing up PvP with a Simulator of Real Life, or three separate viewpoints.

 

Some people had some personal viewpoints to share and were shouted down with an argument from another viewpoint.

 

There's too much "If" as well to be a worthwhile debate. Let's leave opinion to be just that and focus on DCS the simulator rather than DCS the PvP sandbox. DCS isn't well suited to fair PvP for the same reasons that war and conflict in the real world are fair and balanced.

 

Play nicely.

 

It was a very good thread about getting Mig-21Bis kills against modern fighters in DCS multiplayer. Then it got hi-jacked, perhaps by someone who got shot down by a Mig-21bis, saying the Mig-21Bis was OP (lol!) because one of its weapons did not, in that person's opinion, correctly model the flaws that person considered it should.

 

You think the Mig-21Bis is OP? Wait till I get my Spad. Multiplayer is going to get REAL. Although the performance of the Vickers Machine Gun in DCS will be completely unrealistic - it's going to shoot lightning bolts that explode into nuclear-tipped mutant velociraptors... You heard it here first.

[Frostie]

F-86?

http://i.imgur.com/MJnRBm2.webm

F-86F is faster and more agile than the Su-25 and the GAR-8 packs more punch than the R-60M, though the R-60M is more reliable to hit and the RWR is a big plus. Tough call.

[EngineerFalcon]

It was a very good thread about getting Mig-21Bis kills against modern fighters in DCS multiplayer. Then it got hi-jacked, perhaps by someone who got shot down by a Mig-21bis, saying the Mig-21Bis was OP (lol!) because one of its weapons did not, in that person's opinion, correctly model the flaws that person considered it should.

 

You think the Mig-21Bis is OP? Wait till I get my Spad. Multiplayer is going to get REAL. Although the performance of the Vickers Machine Gun in DCS will be completely unrealistic - it's going to shoot lightning bolts that explode into nuclear-tipped mutant velociraptors... You heard it here first.

 

What ?

No one said the 21 was OP. Rather, GGTharos said that the FC3 planes aren't as OP as people in this thread said they were. Also, the R3R is indeed improperly modeled. Just do some research.

 

People can't just fly the planes they like, eh ? They just have to say their plane is underpowered or that the other pilots are noobs.

[Pikey]

50 pages in there was no way I was responding to the the OP, the message was lost in this silly pvp chit-chat. The thread was only going one way though despite how it started.

[tsb47]

What ?

No one said the 21 was OP. Rather, GGTharos said that the FC3 planes aren't as OP as people in this thread said they were.

 

Ah, no. GGTharos did say the Mig-21 was OP:

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.

 

Then you say:

People can't just fly the planes they like, eh ? They just have to say their plane is underpowered or that the other pilots are noobs.

 

GGTharos proves this correct:

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:

....

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

 

You also say:

Also, the R3R is indeed improperly modeled. Just do some research.

 

I don't recall anyone claiming the R3R was properly modelled. I think we said using the Mig-21 to kill F-15s etc was hard. Perhaps check the thread before commanding people to 'just do some research'?

 

EDIT: My original comment about the Spad was tongue in cheek, obviously. But if you don't want to take it in that vein, then you can eat sonic death rays from the nuclear powered vulcan cannon strapped to my DCS X-Wing (which is the next plane to be announced by Leatherneck BTW).

Edited March 11, 2015 by tsb47