Etha2007 Posted March 18, 2021 Share Posted March 18, 2021 We all know that one of the core issues with DCS is that there is simply no REDFOR analogue for the various 4th gen multirole US fighters such as the Hornet, Viper and upcoming Typhoon. However, according to ED themselves, most DCS players play on singleplayer, so I ask- Why not create modern REDFOR A.I assets? Su-27SMs, Su-35s, MiG-29Ks, Su-30SMs..... For some of these, you don't even need to create new 3d models, the Su-27SM can literally just be the current Su-27 that can use air to ground guided munitions, and the R-77. Of course, modern missiles such as the RVV-SD (R-77-1) need to be simulated so that aircraft such as the Su-35 and Su-30SM can properly fight, not to mention a very basic simulation of thrust vectoring, but I feel like the payoff would be worth it. Singleplayer-players can finally have equal opponents to fight, and multiplayer-players can achieve "balance" by giving red team more SAMs and AI assets. Maybe even S-400 SAMs? What do you guys think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocHawkeye Posted March 18, 2021 Share Posted March 18, 2021 Well a big thing to consider here are the real world reasons Russian weapons development has actually lagged behind western development and why so much legacy Warsaw Pact stuff is still relied upon. When the Soviet Union collapsed the region's priorities shifted to more immediate problems like civil order and food supply, so super-abstract stuff like fighter development got shelved for a period of at least a decade, and it was already in danger of falling behind western competing western developments in a number of places. This is not to say that aircraft like the Su-27/33 and MiG-29 weren't competitive, they are still quite competitive-but they're still gen "3.5-ish" airplanes that hit the end of their useful development potential sometime before NATO ran out of places it could take the F/A-18 or Rafale or Typhoon etc. Another thing to consider here is the Russian Federation's new laws prohibiting the release of information on weapons systems, and discouraging the collection and dissemination of knowledge related to just about all of the post-Soviet stuff that is gradually showing up in the RF's garages. So we can expect more and more necessary "guesswork" to simulate Russian Federation equipment going forward with commensurate variability in accuracy and performance. Basically "your mileage may vary" when we go forward with simulating newer Eastern weapons systems. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Etha2007 Posted March 18, 2021 Author Share Posted March 18, 2021 21 minutes ago, DocHawkeye said: Well a big thing to consider here are the real world reasons Russian weapons development has actually lagged behind western development and why so much legacy Warsaw Pact stuff is still relied upon. When the Soviet Union collapsed the region's priorities shifted to more immediate problems like civil order and food supply, so super-abstract stuff like fighter development got shelved for a period of at least a decade, and it was already in danger of falling behind western competing western developments in a number of places. This is not to say that aircraft like the Su-27/33 and MiG-29 weren't competitive, they are still quite competitive-but they're still gen "3.5-ish" airplanes that hit the end of their useful development potential sometime before NATO ran out of places it could take the F/A-18 or Rafale or Typhoon etc. Another thing to consider here is the Russian Federation's new laws prohibiting the release of information on weapons systems, and discouraging the collection and dissemination of knowledge related to just about all of the post-Soviet stuff that is gradually showing up in the RF's garages. So we can expect more and more necessary "guesswork" to simulate Russian Federation equipment going forward with commensurate variability in accuracy and performance. Basically "your mileage may vary" when we go forward with simulating newer Eastern weapons systems. Semi-Agree with your first point. About your second point, I'm not sure if these laws extend to simple SFM AI aircraft? The only thing that would be hard to find info on would be missile data, but the flight performance of the Su-27SM is identical to the baseline Su-27, all ED would need to do to add an Su-27SM is to simply give an R-77 and guided air to ground munitions to the already existing Su-27 (The only major external model change would be a slight change to the position of the IRST). I doubt Russia is so secretive to the point where they won't allow simple AI aircraft. Hell, all ED needs to do to add the MiG-35 (most advanced Fulcrum variant) is to slightly change a few features (such as the size of the "humpback"), add two more pylons and allow it to mount guided air to ground weapons and the R-77. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mars Exulte Posted March 18, 2021 Share Posted March 18, 2021 11 minutes ago, Etha2007 said: About your second point, I'm not sure if these laws extend to simple SFM AI aircraft? I doubt it, it's just a case of manpower, really. But we still have plenty of existing assets that need updating and overhaul *looks meaningfully at Tu-95 and B-52* 1 Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти. 5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts