MiG-29 DCS level

[Kev2go]

This is a broad generalisation that I recognise isn't true in all cases, but it seems from many posts on the forum that E.D. think American's have the money, and are patriotic, and they want to buy the most recent US aircraft available and reinforce its superiority - preferably by shooting fish in a barrel.

 

Forget serving up a balanced fight, just provide a mechanism for domination.

(Like my boy when he was 8 wanted the Transam with the bazooka cheat to blow up the Romans in Age of Empires)

 

I've read posts by Chizh that make me think he thinks Western (US) audiences are 1/ not particularly interested in Russian aircraft, and that 2/ Russian aircraft aren't up to scratch anyway - so wouldn't provide the kind of experience the audience are after.

 

If E.D. don't think they have an audience, and think that if they modelled them correctly they'd be a bit sh*t compared to Western aircraft, why would they work hard to get access to the docs & the OK to model them ?

 

If that's the case then it's a self fulfilling prophesy - only make modern Western aircraft, then point at how much they out sell the Russian FC3 aircraft...

 

 

Im sure if you could get in modernized flanker or fulcum variants those would sell, especially when there is now an over-saturation of US aircraft from the 4th gen. Even if they still wouldn't necessarily offer tech parity.

But as we know such variants aren't possible for the foreseeable future.

 

Ultimately that's CHIZH's opinion, not necessarily the entirely of ED( though it could be?) . I live in a Western country, and have bought cold war soviet classics like the Mig15 and Mig21. IM certainly not the only one who has or who would show interest in a modern Russian gen 4 outside of any Eastern European countries. ED can develop only so many Teen fighters until they are forced to go to an earlier time period or start developing non US originated aircraft.

Edited December 20, 2019 by Kev2go

[Mars Exulte]

I think the TLDR version of this thread is ''Wait and see''. We're never going to know all the back scenes reasons (which are apt to be further complicated by politics and private agreements, indeed in some cases there may be restrictions on even discussing some things).

 

Truth be told, the real ''reason'' is probably a blend of all provided explanations. Politics, market appeal, and the bs that would erupt when ''patriots'' weren't able to chain cobras and ''win'' (which we already see frequently).

 

If it's possible to do, they will doubtless eventually get to it. If it's not, pissing and complaining won't help. In the meantime, buy RedFor to show there's a market for it!

 

Whatever they choose to do, they must insure the aircraft are not trigonometrically naive! I hate that.

Edited December 21, 2019 by zhukov032186

[Weta43]

Im sure if you could get in modernized flanker or fulcum variants those would sell, especially when there is now an over-saturation of US aircraft from the 4th gen. Even if they still wouldn't necessarily offer tech parity.

But as we know such variants aren't possible for the foreseeable future.

 

Ultimately that's CHIZH's opinion, not necessarily the entirely of ED( though it could be?) . I live in a Western country, and have bought cold war soviet classics like the Mig15 and Mig21. IM certainly not the only one who has or who would show interest in a modern Russian gen 4 outside of any Eastern European countries. ED can develop only so many Teen fighters until they are forced to go to an earlier time period or start developing non US originated aircraft.

 

Completely agree

[TOYKILLA]

Hmm, flanker was the Base of all this here, with the SU-27

 

Back to the Roots

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G973F mit Tapatalk

[FoxAlfa]

I'd buy a full Fulcrum and/or Flanker module in a heartbeat and I'll keep saying it until it happens.

 

Also!

[azm]

We are talking about military secrets here. So if ED does something which the russian government does not like ED closes its doors faster than you can count to 3.

So as long as there is no bulletproof agreement with rus gov ED will keep silent. Easy as that.

Right!

[FINISTRUS]

I also noticed that the ED mod has unfinished modules, early access. f-16 is already the edge, 20% of all systems work

[RaceFuel85]

I'd happily buy a full fidelity MiG-29A or Su-27...so the belief that "americans wouldn't buy it" is generally false and probably a bit of an over-simplified point of view.

[CommanderRabb]

Would be interested in a MiG-29 and I'm a North American. But it has to be full fidelity. I can't stand those ex Lomac modules with the non interactive cockpits.

Edited December 25, 2019 by CommanderRabb

[TOYKILLA]

The Lomac Cockpit controls are outdated, but i fly them anyway, because i love the Mig29 and SU27

 

FC4 with only a clickable Cockpit functionality and nothing more,would be a big Step forward for DCS , for a small amount of work.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G973F mit Tapatalk

Edited January 2, 2020 by TOYKILLA

[Mars Exulte]

The Lomac Cockpit controls are outdated, but i fly them anyway, because i love the Mig29 and SU27

 

FC4 with only a clickable Cockpit functionality and nothing more,would be a big Step forward for DCS , for a small amount of work.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G973F mit Tapatalk

 

That's not a small amount of work. There is no equivalent to pressing one button to turn on ''electrical power'' and another button to start engines. That's a dozen switches. Which all have to be conmected to SOMETHING, which means at least to a limited extent simulating those tertiary systems, and if you're going to half ass it, you might as well do it all the way. There is no ''just decorative button flipping'', and if all you want is just the exact same thing but clicking a button instead you haven't accomplished anything.

[TOYKILLA]

If you Click on left Engine start,it could start a visible sequence of the Engine Start proceeding, but it still does nothing more in the background,than the actually FC3 Keyboard shortcuts.

 

Like the Autostart sequence in a DCS Module but only as a visible feature.

 

But with a clickable Mig29 FC4 Cockpit,you can click on the Autopilot buttons, click your external and internal lighting ,click on landing gear, and mutch more, without changing the systems in the Background. Some buttons are already moving, when we use our Keyboard, but I'm a VR only DCS Pilot and using my 4 Thrustmaster MFD's with Shortcuts, destroying the hole immersion in a Mig29 or Su27. Why they have removed the Pilot Bodies in the Mig29's? A empty Cockipit is also a nogo in VR.

 

I would pay for FC4 and I'm a LockOn user from the beginning and own already FC,FC2 and FC3

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G973F mit Tapatalk

Edited January 2, 2020 by TOYKILLA

[Harlikwin]

Im sure if you could get in modernized flanker or fulcum variants those would sell, especially when there is now an over-saturation of US aircraft from the 4th gen. Even if they still wouldn't necessarily offer tech parity.

But as we know such variants aren't possible for the foreseeable future.

 

Ultimately that's CHIZH's opinion, not necessarily the entirely of ED( though it could be?) . I live in a Western country, and have bought cold war soviet classics like the Mig15 and Mig21. IM certainly not the only one who has or who would show interest in a modern Russian gen 4 outside of any Eastern European countries. ED can develop only so many Teen fighters until they are forced to go to an earlier time period or start developing non US originated aircraft.

 

I actually think if they made some 60's and 70's western birds it would be as good for the community, with the Mig23 MLA coming you basically have a good cross section of red air from the cold war from the mig15-23, minus the 17 and strike aircraft. But from the same timeframe you have the F86 and F5E which is still probably too modern of a variant and thats it. I think the F4E they were planning would be perfect as it was the universal western cold war fighter. And eventually we will get the Mirage F1, the F14A, and the F8J.

 

 

I still would love a mig29 of whatever sort (more modern would be nice, mig29k would be nicer).

[Mars Exulte]

If you Click on left Engine start,it could start a visible sequence of the Engine Start proceeding, but it still does nothing more in the background,than the actually FC3 Keyboard shortcuts.

 

Like the Autostart sequence in a DCS Module but only as a visible feature.

 

But with a clickable Mig29 FC4 Cockpit,you can click on the Autopilot buttons, click your external and internal lighting ,click on landing gear, and mutch more, without changing the systems in the Background. Some buttons are already moving, when we use our Keyboard, but I'm a VR only DCS Pilot and using my 4 Thrustmaster MFD's with Shortcuts, destroying the hole immersion in a Mig29 or Su27. Why they have removed the Pilot Bodies in the Mig29's? A empty Cockipit is also a nogo in VR.

 

I would pay for FC4 and I'm a LockOn user from the beginning and own already FC,FC2 and FC3

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G973F mit Tapatalk

 

Yeah, I know what you mean, but they're not going to do that. Not in DCS itself, at any rate. Eventually, the FC aircraft should be removed altogether and moved to the MAC ecosystem, then all of this will become moot.

[Harlikwin]

Pretty wise thought. Who'll be flying for the red team then?

 

Um anyone that wants to fly red? There is a pretty big demand for vagiely balanced redfor AC.

[Mars Exulte]

Um anyone that wants to fly red? There is a pretty big demand for vagiely balanced redfor AC.

 

Pretty much. It's not like it's all FC vs ''realies'' as it is, or they'd have to gimp the Blue team's best weapons even more than most servers do, and we DO have a range of traditional RedFor aircraft inbound now. 27s and 29s or similar aircraft are inevitable. We just got a Jf-17 which is arguably more capable than either one. RedFor does not mean ''Russian''.

 

Also, the community does not revolve around online PvP, so Red vs Blue aircraft is completely irrelevant except to a small group, or to enthusiasts.

Edited January 3, 2020 by zhukov032186

[TOYKILLA]

So long we dosen't have a DCS Mig29 or Su27/33,25T ,we should be Happy for Flaming cliffs in DCS.

 

I came from LockOn and don't need old Fighter Jets like a Mig15 or Mig19,i dont need Warbirds and i find Helicopters nice to have.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G973F mit Tapatalk

[Mars Exulte]

They're not ''disappearing''. There is a separate product for that specific market being developed, and these planes and their users are likely to end up in MAC. Note the sticky in the FC3 thread by Wags stating the only reason FC3 is still part of DCS is 'aircraft variety'. The scene has changed a lot over the last 7 years. I expect FC3's days are numbered. Nobody's going to ''lose'' anything. There will be two separate games eventual, DCS over here, and MAC with the current FC3 planes plus whatever they eventually add to it (probably mostly stripped versions of the DCS planes). It doesn't make any sense having such very different products integrated in one game.

[TOYKILLA]

I also fly the most of the Time a DCS Module and my primary Cockpit is the F/A-18C , but DCS comes from LockOn and LockOn comes from Flanker. DCS wouldn't complete without these Airframes.

 

It's no reason to put energy in a Second product, because we can Easy make Flaming Cliffs or DCS Modul only Servers .

 

Or we can still use them both in the Future, for people who like the Airframes.

 

But if ED has a DCS SU27 and a Mig29 in the Pipeline, nobody would cry about losing FC in DCS.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G973F mit Tapatalk

Edited January 4, 2020 by TOYKILLA

[Harlikwin]

I also fly the most of the Time a DCS Module and my primary Cockpit is the F/A-18C , but DCS comes from LockOn and LockOn comes from Flanker. DCS wouldn't complete without these Airframes.

 

It's no reason to put energy in a Second product, because we can Easy make Flaming Cliffs or DCS Modul only Servers .

 

Or we can still use them both in the Future, for people who like the Airframes.

 

But if ED has a DCS SU27 and a Mig29 in the Pipeline, nobody would cry about losing FC in DCS.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G973F mit Tapatalk

 

You are right to a point but FC3 has the SU-25 as well. Which is a "core" plane for "red". If ED does anything, I'd love to see a full fi Su-27 or mig-29 multirole version (so its at least competitive with current blue M/R fighters), and some reasonably modern variant of the SU-25 (though I still want an A variant).

[Harlikwin]

Would you rather buy MiG-29A or F/A-18C(if it wasn't available) that's the question

 

No question, mig29A.

[Harlikwin]

Pretty much. It's not like it's all FC vs ''realies'' as it is, or they'd have to gimp the Blue team's best weapons even more than most servers do, and we DO have a range of traditional RedFor aircraft inbound now. 27s and 29s or similar aircraft are inevitable. We just got a Jf-17 which is arguably more capable than either one. RedFor does not mean ''Russian''.

 

Also, the community does not revolve around online PvP, so Red vs Blue aircraft is completely irrelevant except to a small group, or to enthusiasts.

 

I think for decades "red" meant Russian. I mean, what else is there from the 50's-90's? Sure today you have a few native Chinese designs, but most are not exported.

 

As for PvP not being the biggest, well maybe not, but we are probably the loudest :thumbup:

[Mars Exulte]

I think for decades "red" meant Russian. I mean, what else is there from the 50's-90's? Sure today you have a few native Chinese designs, but most are not exported.

 

As for PvP not being the biggest, well maybe not, but we are probably the loudest :thumbup:

 

True on both points =)

 

@Gahab

No, it's not. Thus the offline component. It is exactly like every flight sim that came before it, with offline campaigns etc and a session based multiplayer lobby. You can play every module in DCS ''in combat'' and never touch the multiplayer button. And yes, people joyriding is a viable activity as well.