SD-10 nerfed too much

Aim-120C now is a super missile with super super guidance and literally its extra difficult to notch

Aim-120C now is a super missile with super super guidance and literally its extra difficult to notch

Just based on some quick testing its anything but a super missile. In fact, due to the decreased motor burn time and thrust, the min abort range has gone down a mile or so at high altitude. Guidance seems the same as normal, but it appears that the ccm_k0 is now 0.04 (idk what it was at before, it was never in the files). I'd be hesitant to call it a buff, unless there's something major my testing didnt cover.

Aim-120C now is a super missile with super super guidance and literally its extra difficult to notch

This is about what it should be. The SD-10 was never meant to overtake the C-5, it's less effective, theoretically, than the earlier C revisions.

How ineffective is anyone's guess. I would say it's probably in the ballpark now, and should either be restored to pre-last patch values (Still would be within values for this variant for the C-5) or stay like this.

Just based on some quick testing its anything but a super missile. In fact, due to the decreased motor burn time and thrust, the min abort range has gone down a mile or so at high altitude. Guidance seems the same as normal, but it appears that the ccm_k0 is now 0.04 (idk what it was at before, it was never in the files). I'd be hesitant to call it a buff, unless there's something major my testing didnt cover.

I think the biggest buff people are noticing is that Active Radar missiles (which includes the SD-10 and R77) have had their terminal guidance "Seizure" problems resolved. Which actually does greatly increase range even if physical attributes of the missile have been reduced. No more missiles turning 180 degrees AWAY from the target and then spinning all the way back to start guiding once again.

This is hearsay, of course. I don't actually know if the problem is fully addressed yet.

This is about what it should be. The SD-10 was never meant to overtake the C-5, it's less effective, theoretically, than the earlier C revisions.

 

 

 

How ineffective is anyone's guess. I would say it's probably in the ballpark now, and should either be restored to pre-last patch values (Still would be within values for this variant for the C-5) or stay like this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think the biggest buff people are noticing is that Active Radar missiles (which includes the SD-10 and R77) have had their terminal guidance "Seizure" problems resolved. Which actually does greatly increase range even if physical attributes of the missile have been reduced. No more missiles turning 180 degrees AWAY from the target and then spinning all the way back to start guiding once again.

 

This is hearsay, of course. I don't actually know if the problem is fully addressed yet.

are u saying that SD-10 also fixed in guidance ?????

As I understand it eventually ALL missiles will be (re)done by ED. No more bias or 3rd party interpretations and top trump competitions. Just be patient.

As I understand it eventually ALL missiles will be (re)done by ED. No more bias or 3rd party interpretations and top trump competitions. Just be patient.

I think there is a point of conjecture if its all "Future" missiles. Or also all "Existing" missiles. I'm mostly hoping for the latter.

Chizh made it sound they would like to if they have the time, so it could go either way

JF-17 is badly broken after this patch

SD-10 nerfed and Self Protection Jammer not working anymore... the best plane for BVR besides the Tomcat is now trashed.

What’s different with SD-10?

Obviously we need a realistic aerodynamics model for the SD-10 and all other main missiles in DCS. I hope this can be the case sooner than later. Especially the Phoenix needs some much needed work, which solely relies on ED.

ED's team only cares about "their" missiles. The aim120 has been updated several times during the last two month and what did they do on the sd10? They fking nerfed it, so stupid, good marketing I guess, making the aim120 the god missile and their F18 and F16 will sell good. This is such a disrespect for the 3rd party developers

sooner or later it was due to happen.

I loved DCS for years. But due to this prejudice and biased strategies I have totally lost interest. Time to say bye bye to DCS.

ED's team only cares about "their" missiles. The aim120 has been updated several times during the last two month and what did they do on the sd10? They fking nerfed it, so stupid, good marketing I guess, making the aim120 the god missile and their F18 and F16 will sell good. This is such a disrespect for the 3rd party developers

This makes no sense. First of all, at least ED have said that it was Deka themselves that have changed the missile ("nerfed" is a rather loaded word.. it could also be "fixed"). It would be nice if Deka either acknowledged or denied this to clarify the situation. I can understand that there are discussions between ED and any 3rd party to find a consensus on what is the actual real world performance. This is exactly how it should be as both parties surely have some talented people who can learn from each other, and because without common baselines the relative performance of the missiles might be completely off.

Secondly, this idea that ED is sabotaging their third party developers seems completely absurd. ED is more likely to be more dependent on good 3rd party developers than the 3rd party developers are on ED. They add so much content and potential to the simulation, not to mention sales, which of ED is of course receiving their percentage. The idea that ED would do anything to anger their 3rd party developers would be incredibly poor business.

To be blunt, it seems that you are just disappointed that you don't have an overhand with SD-10 that you used to have earlier, without even trying to establish if the initial overhand was due to potential errors or bad relative performance of the SD-10 compared to the AIM-120. Have you even done any testing on how they relatively perform currently (I have, and I can't see the SD-10 being in that terrible state)?

What I do grand though is, that other ED missiles and the API (in case of AIM-54, for example, if I've understood correctly) do need further development. But one has to start the development from somewhere, with the other missiles coming next. I just don't see that this currently applies to SD-10.

If you check the thread Chizh commented on, they gave CFD based corrections to change the missile

If you check the thread Chizh commented on, they gave CFD based corrections to change the missile

Yes, but they didn't unilaterally just change things. I'd expect that those simulations were used as basis to discuss with Deka, rather than come with an ultimatum and most likely Deka even agreed with them. Again, anything else would be detrimental to the relationship between Deka and ED, and I can't see it would be a feasible way for ED to interact with their partners.

Chizh also said explicitly that ED didn't change the battery time (which I interpret that Deka themselves did):

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4348756&postcount=111

Yes, but they didn't unilaterally just change things. I'd expect that those simulations were used as basis to discuss with Deka, rather than come with an ultimatum and most likely Deka even agreed with them. Again, anything else would be detrimental to the relationship between Deka and ED, and I can't see it would be a feasible way for ED to interact with their partners.

 

Chizh also said explicitly that ED didn't change the battery time (which I interpret that Deka themselves did):

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4348756&postcount=111

Yeah I think what happened is that ED did the CFD, gave that to info deka to "fix", and Deka "fixed" it. I don't think ED unilaterally did anything.

The SD10 actually still is in the ballpark range wise of the 120C with the current patch based on my testing.

The 120 however has greatly improved guidance, which will get better in the future. While the SD10 is still on the old system, which has advantages and disadvantages.

Also per Chiz the improved countermeasures resistance of the 120 might have been a bug.