Any MiG-21bis Improve Plan? - Page 8 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-03-2018, 11:22 AM   #71
-Martin-
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 60
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shibbyland View Post
Hi,


I haven't bought the MiG 21 yet, I'm tossing up between the MiG and the M2000. I think I'd prefer the MiG as I already have BVR capable aircraft with all the modern kit, the MiG seems a bit more...'classic' I suppose, I bit rougher and I like that.


In saying that, it seems to lack support from the developers (I could be wrong it just looks that way from the reading I've been doing). For those of you who have owned the MiG for a while, has it changed much during it's early access? Has it improved? Are you confident it will be fully released?


I'm always cautious when I see something has been in early access as long as this module has. It'd be nice to get bonus $ or be able to use my bonus $, I don't know why this developer has opted not to do that, it's a shame but it's not a deal breaker.


Looking for opinions please, and if you can, any information which supports the ongoing development of the MiG. At the moment all I can find is the bi-plane they're working on and their facebook page doesn't have much recent information on it.

I think you should not expect that the plane will significantly change in future, what you see now is pretty much what you get. Nevertheless, the impression that you got from reading the forum might be misleading. It is already a nice plane and there are a variety of things to do: Intercept bombers, air to ground rockets are very effective as the piper (with the radar on in a beam mode) can precisely tell you the impact point, it has IFF, it has autopilot, and other stuff you will not find in say F-5. It is challenging to land, it is challenging to fight against F-5s.



Based on my previous experience you can reasonably expect that there will always appear new bugs, but in one or two month the developer shall fix them. When a new piece of technology from ED comes, in one or two month the developer shall implement it. There are other issues that would be so great to have fully developed (ASP, SAU, RWR), but not because the plane would not be enjoyable or playable now, but because the plane is so great that it would become a legend of DCS if it was brought to perfection. That is what people want, but I would not expect that.



Hope this helps.
__________________
DCS needs AI bombers for all periods, and with working tailguns.
Modules: Su-27, Su-33, L-39ZA/C, Mig-21Bis, Mig-15Bis, KA-50, SA-342; Wish List: Mig-19P, Mi-24P, Mig-23MLA
CH Combatstick, CH Pro Throttle, CH Pro Pedals
-Martin- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2018, 11:47 AM   #72
bkthunder
Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 871
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by -Martin- View Post


Based on my previous experience you can reasonably expect that there will always appear new bugs, but in one or two month the developer shall fix them.
That surely is not the experience we are getting with the MiG-21. There are open bugs that are 4 years old, no fix.

When talking about buying a module (this vs. that), there are many opinions about how good it is, how fun it is etc. But all of these should be measured starting from a common point: this is a study sim.
So sure, the MiG-21 is playable, you can shoot stuff, it's fun to land. But does it do all those things in a realistic way, representing the real aircraft?
__________________
Windows 10 - Intel i7 7700K 4.2 Ghz (no OC) - Asus Strix GTX 1080 8Gb - 16GB DDR4 (3000 MHz) - SSD 500GB + WD Black FZEX 1TB 6Gb/s
bkthunder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2018, 12:13 PM   #73
Shibbyland
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 61
Default

Thanks for the input, I think on balance it might be worth buying on sale but doesn’t sound like it has the support to warrant paying full price over a different module. I’ll probably still keep it in mind because the older gear is fantastic and I was after that comparison of a delta wing older fighter vs playing with some of the newer stuff.

Ultimately no matter how interesting it is to fly there’s only so much fun you can have taking off and landing. If it’s not getting updated and isnt likely to have content such as campaigns added then it’s probably best I hold off.

Maybe one day we’ll have more aircraft from that period to bring the MiG into the spotlight again.
Shibbyland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2018, 08:11 AM   #74
Tesarus
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by -Rudel- View Post
There will be an update on our development in October...
Thank you for continuing support of this module Despite all of its flaws it's my favorite!

Last edited by Tesarus; 10-09-2018 at 08:14 AM.
Tesarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2018, 04:54 PM   #75
SpeedStick
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 315
Default

Well unfortunately SAU Recovery Pitch down bug wasnt fixed now either. Lets just hope the other news is good...
__________________
"Hard to imagine bigger engine. its got a beautiful face and an arse built like sputnik." - Pikey AKA The Poet, on 37 Viggen.
SpeedStick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 10:24 AM   #76
vparez
Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: France
Posts: 102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkthunder
So sure, the MiG-21 is playable, you can shoot stuff, it's fun to land. But does it do all those things in a realistic way, representing the real aircraft?
I know a couple of real MiG21 pilots for whom this module would be quite acceptable as a training sim.

On the other hand, I know quite a lot of real armchair pilots for whom this module is not an adequate sim of the real MiG21.

I let you decide who of these two is a better reference.
vparez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 10:45 AM   #77
Jonne
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 66
Default

Maybe those armchair pilots would make better MiG-21 pilots then
__________________
Jonne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2018, 04:14 AM   #78
Fri13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,512
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vparez View Post
I know a couple of real MiG21 pilots for whom this module would be quite acceptable as a training sim.

On the other hand, I know quite a lot of real armchair pilots for whom this module is not an adequate sim of the real MiG21.

I let you decide who of these two is a better reference.
And since the start, many real pilots said that. And we have had multiple radical flight model changes.

Without ANY "armchair pilots" knowing ANYTHING about how the real aircraft handles, that is what makes everything questionable...

If the first version was developed with multiple real pilots etc to early access, why it got changed radically after EA? Why it got multiple changes?

Like how many years went by that we had the core functions wrong, like a missile selector switch being a "chosen", instead "preferred"?

I don't even know how that gunsight pipper should behave. Should it move and lock on target when IR missile senses a heat source, or should it be fixed and not move? Should the pipper move dynamically showing a calculated impact point for bombs when doing ground attack with radar metering? I don't even know what is the current roll behavior realism status. Does aircraft roll too fast or too slowly, or is it now correct?

One of the major features with Mig was the first nuclear bomb capable aircraft, with lots of trouble from ED old map engine, but that wasn't developers fault as they can't do what ED has not yet implemented.
But when so many things starts to be in the waiting list, it is just hard for many as many has tolerances already pushed to overlimit.


So many core things are depending from ED, like the RWR situation. Real SPO-15 has a totally different radar emission classification and power presentation than what it has now in Su-25A/T, Su-27S and now still likely just refreshed Mig-29S (didn't look that in testing, even when few times in quick air to air missions). And here someone told about the SPO-10 features still missing.
So all that seems to be waiting ED to get radars functions working, goal get right RWR behavior and IFF even.

But considering things like IFF, it has never worked. And how hard it is to make a simple version when is its basics well known? https://youtu.be/DmNKsFTwaQE

Even a crude over simple version is better than nothing. Just get a confirmation if target is friend, otherwise just unknown. Yeah, make some fancy things to cause someone be now then a unknown when should be a friend and you get people just quickly learn that unknown is not enemy but requires a visual confirmation etc.

Likely we get these with F-14 coming out, as that is one of its major features to be able visually identify targets at long range.

Developers has often hands tied when they are dependable from other party, in this case Mig-21 developer and ED. If ED doesn't allow something to be done before they do it to all, then everyone is waiting ED to implement it. And if situation changes in ED that feature gets pushed 3-5 years... Sucks to be any customer from any module.

The software business is little odd in many ways compared to real world problem fixing. Ie, if a customer roof is leaking, a constructor doesn't want to hear from manufacturer representative; "wait to the next year, as we are going to release a new product", but get a new replacement on that day so customer gets the roof fixed before annual rain season. Even a temporary fix is better than no fix at all.

As that is the situation. A leaking roof withstand few rainy days with minimal damage, but overtime the rains gets more periodic and heavier and rain season starts and then everyone has a problem.
In this case, module owners are the rain, and house owners are the module developers and roof manufacturer is the ED.

In time, more and more angry customers will appear and it is trouble if the problem doesn't get fixed before there is too much water damage that can't be fixed.

And this ain't only about Mig-21 anymore for some. It is all about the DCS. How can anyone be sure about anything?

It is like a house of cards, you need to get every piece to hold and be correctly placed.

--
I usually post from my phone so please excuse any typos, inappropriate punctuation and capitalization, missing words and general lack of cohesion and sense in my posts.....
__________________
i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 1080Ti SLI 11GB, Oculus CV1.
i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 60" HDR 4K.
Fri13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2018, 07:01 AM   #79
Shibbyland
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 61
Default

I'm still on board with DCS. Of all the flight sims I own, the flight models in DCS feel the most authentic. In saying that, they gotta stop letting developers release something and then not finish it, it's damaging to the entire sim.
Shibbyland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2018, 10:56 AM   #80
Harle
Member
 
Harle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Russia
Posts: 626
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vparez View Post
I know a couple of real MiG21 pilots for whom this module would be quite acceptable as a training sim.

On the other hand, I know quite a lot of real armchair pilots for whom this module is not an adequate sim of the real MiG21.

I let you decide who of these two is a better reference.
What does your couple of real MiG21 pilots have to say about the ASP implementation within this module?
Harle is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:49 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.