Jump to content

"Realism vs. Balance" - which MiG-29 for future project?


"Realism vs. Balance" - which MiG-29 for future project?  

111 members have voted

  1. 1. "Realism vs. Balance" - which MiG-29 for future project?

    • MiG-29 9.12B - it exists in the theater, and its simplicity gives more time to develop F-16C better.
      25
    • MiG-29SMT - better gameplay balance, because it uses TARH AAMs and PGMs, just like F-16C.
      88


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 111
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Surely the answer is "Both"?

 

I know the information is out there for the 9.12 and F16C - I'm not sure whether the information IS out there for the -SMT, and I wouldn't like to see ED fabricate avionics details for the level of complexity we're apparently going to get.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SMT. Puttin gin the F-16C without an equivalent aircraft on the other side would be pretty ah, lame, I think. Likewise for the other way around.

 

Even right now you can see there's issues with such a simple thing as the NATO side not having any flyable SEAD aircraft for example.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SMT. Puttin gin the F-16C without an equivalent aircraft on the other side would be pretty ah, lame, I think. Likewise for the other way around.

 

Even right now you can see there's issues with such a simple thing as the NATO side not having any flyable SEAD aircraft for example.

 

Ditto.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This question depends on the year of the modelling conflict. But surely MiG-29SMT much more intresting to play.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

летаю на заказ, дорого...

"The FlankerForce"© -=приостановлено=-

Лучшее средство завоевания господства в воздухе - танк посередине ВПП © не установлено

АХТУНГ! эксперды атакуют!

Только отсутствие разведанных запасов нефти в Антарктиде, удерживает пингвинов от демократии.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Realism = no compromise

 

What do you mean? Do you mean that these improved Migs don't exist or that they can't be modelled accurately?

 

If it's the latter, there are stil a lot of issues regarding current accuracy of the migs/sues. Look how long it took Flanker to reach current state. I would rather agree to some compromise which can be adapted as more info becomes available than to have a turkey shoot sim. It's not even 9.13S with AWACS/GCI. It would be pointless.

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the SMT was modelled we'd end up with a 1990s F-15 v 2005 Mig ... hardly realistic! Although there are already a number of systems modelled that are way out of time frame.

 

I'd rather have more 1990s a/c ... F-16 (early block)/Mirage/Jag/Mig-21/23 plus current a/c all with AFM and WAFM than something which is just so unrealistic. Possibly plus some 2 seaters ...

 

If you want the latest Migs, give us Typhoon/Raptor ... which I know you can't because the systems are secret!

 

I guess this is turning more into a Russian a/c sim (which given that the sponsor is Russian is understandably) ... but it'll make online play much more boring if its just Russian v Russian!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cant think how the vanilla mig could be left out since it is present in Lockon and since there is information for modelling it. I think ED should consider the option to add the Mig SMT in a later addon and put the vanilla Mig first.

 

This would allow the team concentrate on a sigle plane once the SIM is out, so we would have quality on both migs.

If theres going to be a second addon to the SIM, I would consider squeezing the F-15 and SU-27 in.

  • Like 1

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9.12, definitely.

 

I think ED has already modelled a good number of protoype aircraft.

If they choose the SMT, they don't have to complain if people call the game "Lock On Modern Air Testing". Instead of the desert or Black Sea they'd better set up the game at Kubinka or Ramenskoye AB :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the SMT was modelled we'd end up with a 1990s F-15 v 2005 Mig ... hardly realistic! Although there are already a number of systems modelled that are way out of time frame.

 

I'd rather have more 1990s a/c ... F-16 (early block)/Mirage/Jag/Mig-21/23 plus current a/c all with AFM and WAFM than something which is just so unrealistic. Possibly plus some 2 seaters ...

 

I agree completely!!! The timeframe of Lomac has gotten totally screwed up. Even now, it seems that its comparing apples to oranges in some cases (pre-LASTE A-10 vs. Su-25T??).

 

BTW, I love it whenever anyone mentions the Jag--rep inbound!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright if you guys get your SMT, I want my F-22 Raptor muhahaha

 

 

But for real, lets stick with the timeline here folks. I wouldn't mind seeing a US carrier aircraft (I.E. the Hornet) heck it's pretty much already modeled they just gotta make a cockpit for it. ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely the answer is "Both"?

 

I know the information is out there for the 9.12 and F16C - I'm not sure whether the information IS out there for the -SMT, and I wouldn't like to see ED fabricate avionics details for the level of complexity we're apparently going to get.

I completely agree.

 

I'd rather have a, realistically modelled, old 9.12 (based on sufficient documentation) than a modern 29SMT (if ED does not have sufficient documentation for the SMT).

 

they just gotta make a cockpit for it. ;)
Just a highly-detailed 3D cockpit, with clickable knobs, MFD etc..., a (realistic) ground radar (which is not modelled for any Lockon flyables), AFM, etc ;)
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...