Jump to content

Max1mus

Members
  • Content Count

    293
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Max1mus

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Why not be honest and just say "No, there will not be a rework". Why do you try to pretend that you care about these missiles? The focus is clearly only on NATO modules and assets (MiG-29A is a NATO fighter). Who are you trying to keep on board? You have the statistics, most of those people have already stopped playing/paying for your game. Just add "No longer supported" onto the FC3 modules and be done with it. You will have more time to work on your NATO missiles and planes and make those even more profitable. I dont get it.
  2. Значит, мы не получем, потому что эта ракета нам не нужна? Ф-18 кстати не нужны AGM-88 и AGM-65. JSOW и JDAM достаточно эффективные. ...
  3. There is a 2020s Eurofighter coming with Meteor missiles, do you seriously still want an 80s Su-27S? Thats like putting an F-4 against Su-35. DCS air to air is only NATO vs NATO, especially in MP. People interested in russian aircraft will move to products that offer a proper environment, and not 2020s NATO vs 1980s soviet air force. With ED confirming that they will do nothing about it, aswell as them even cancelling the missiles rework for at least our old 80s soviet garbage, im suprised you guys even play anymore. At this point even games like Arma offer a better experience for ea
  4. Not really. 95% of the time it will still go for chaff due to the poor coefficient, whether the radar is notched or not. Compare the difference for R-27ER between "ECM" and "NO ECM" tests. ECM makes radar unnotchable and the issue youre referring to is irrelevant. (Ignore AIM-120 values, their ECCM has been changed since then). This means that the ER will not benefit much from any radar fixes, because in DCS SARH missiles themselves go for chaff, instead of the radar loosing lock to the chaff. And since the R-27ER has a terrible CCM coefficient, it will still not track
  5. ER_doesnt_Track_Through_Turns_2.trk ER_doesnt_Track_Through_Turns_1.trk
  6. ED will fall flat on their face with all this hype. Its going to be another AMRAAM/JDAM carrier with nothing new except a different flight model. The most "eagerly awaited" Module in DCS is the Su-27SM3, given that it was apparently already being developed, then cancelled, in 2013. But by using the phrase "eagerly awaited" and "brainmelter" in relation to another half-finished NATO 4th gen, they played themselves. Luckily there is another well-known game developer headed towards at least low fidelity 4th gens. So whether its going to be it or ED, we will not have to wait for a modern russia
  7. Upgraded versions of MiG-29 and Su-27 are excellent multirole fighters, with excellent anti ship and SEAD capabilities aswell as TV and laser guided weapons. Unfortunately ED does not want to fill this niche with their simulator despite having the option to do so with low fidelity. To ever fly those planes, we will have to wait for a competitor in the market...
  8. People here are asking for modules that you cannot make in full fidelity, to be made in low fidelity. I highly doubt anyone here enjoys simplified avionics, but we will accept it if that is the only way to get absolutely necessairy modules that DCS is absolutely lacking at the moment.
  9. Even a low fidelity, modern russian fighter would be more brainmelting than anything ED will announce...
  10. Then its not "eagerly awaited". Another AMRAAM/JDAM bus is the last thing DCS is lacking right now.
  11. Why not an FC3 level variant, perhabs with some full fidelity features? You could make a more modern version of either the 29 or -27/-30 that way. We need something, the russian side can not defend itself at all at the moment. https://forums.eagle.ru/filedata/fetch?id=6735775&d=1603062188
  12. This has been a massive problem. I hope ED puts an end to this arms race between developers soon. On the topic of G, the R-3R in DCS can pull 20+G and yet it is easily outmaneuvered inside perfect parameters with enough energy remaining. An AIM-54 could be capable of doing 60Gs but not have the lift to hit anything if it aquires a target too far off the nose. We all await the promised takeover of all missiles by Eagle Dynamics, it needs to be a much higher priority than it is now.
  13. I was taking this bug into context with EDs complete disregard of non-NATO equipment in DCS. We arent getting any modern units or missiles, even AI, while the blue side and hoggit make one post, and get everything they ask for. We cant even get a simple bug fixed that requires nothing but a change of a single line in a .lua, as pointed out above. Thats how little ED cares about the red side.
  14. These first few prototypes never made it into service. The MiG-29M/K that got into service in the 2000s, after it got more funding, had a much much improved radar (Zhuk-ME) over MiG-29S, with ability to engage 4 targets at once, much much better fuel endurance (closer to an F-16/18 ), Link16 tier datalink aswell as EOS which according to some sources covers 360 degrees, can be used as a TGP and detects missile launches. It also has a more modern RWR. In short, it can fight independently and has the tools to fight back against 2000s missiles and fighters, unlike earlier, 80s variants. This
  15. Because ED has decided that DCS is a NATO only simulator. I remember a bug with the MiG-29 RWR that made it invisible for an entire year (making the Fulcrum useless). Turns out that exactly what i thought happened - they had it fixed for months, but only implemented it with the MiG-29 FM update, to maximize profits. It is possible that ED has abandoned the russian missiles for their "brainmelting" disappointment of upcoming module, probably some useless 80s MiG-29 variant. Why should they fix anything now, when they can generate way more hype by waiting for another year. Though i wond
×
×
  • Create New...