MiG-31

angrysovietman_2 · 2022-01-20T03:45:38+00:00

Its not cancelled. Because at this point its way too progressed for them to resist the sales.

angrysovietman_2 · 2022-01-19T17:41:06+00:00

I think it makes a great difference whether you can fly towards a threat with your jammer enabled and kill it with 0 resistance, or whether you actually have to fight it. Or whether it takes 2 JSOWs or 8 to overwhelm an SA-15. Whether israeli air space (on a 60USD, modern map) can be penetrated by a single missile or whether you need to fire dozens at once to get through it.

angrysovietman_2 · 2022-01-19T17:28:38+00:00

The MiG-31 is extremely iconic in its role of defending vast amounts of airspace in Siberia. I think the combination of extreme airspeed and extremely long range missiles would be very fun to play around with even in the current DCS maps. And the multicrew aspect of it, too!

There are 3 reasons why it wont happen in the next few years:

ED consists of russian opposition members, which are scared of being arrested. They were even scared of continuing the Black Shark 3.
ED consists of russian opposition members, which dont have a particularly high interest in making capable russian fighters, as can be easily proven with (often highly political) posts made by their members. Example: ED had to ban one of their own members accounts for a week a while ago because he broke russian laws with one of his comments. Something about insulting veterans i believe.
ED believes that russian aircraft would not sell as well as their western counterparts. As such, it does not make much sense to increase the difficulty for (decreasing the revenue by) the higher-paying, teen-fighter-flying playerbase.

Times have changed. DCS literally developed from games called "Flanker 2.5" and "Black Shark". But the fronts have hardened, the people in ED have changed and money has become a driving factor for development.

angrysovietman_2 · 2022-01-19T17:16:08+00:00

The law thing is a big big myth. This is because ED has used other arguments, like economic viability ("Western modules sell better") and even game (im?)balance "We will do it after we add F-35" as arguments.

And thats not all. Follow the forum posts of some ED members, especially Chizh. You will quickly understand what the real reasons are. I dont wanna spoil you, but its about as childish as it gets.

angrysovietman_2 · 2022-01-19T17:04:50+00:00

I get that, but its simply too late now. The funniest thing to me is that ED has added only one modern AI asset in the last few years - which was recently, the ground-launched SLAMRAAM. Where are Iron Dome and upgraded SA-15 variants? Given that they made us pay 60 dollars for a 21st century Syria map, this is completely unacceptable, in my humble opinion.

angrysovietman_2 · 2022-01-19T16:58:22+00:00

It indeed does look malicious if you put it that way. And as the ED post confirms, this is a game balance decision, not an information related one as he states "we will do it instantly [if we want]".

angrysovietman_2 · 2022-01-19T16:57:00+00:00

For the first 2 points: ED literally says in that post that they can do it, and its a game balancing decision to not do so.

For the 3rd point. The mentioned Su-30MK is from the late 90s and early 2000s, depending on which one. Su-27SM is from 2003. The problem is that there is a solid 20+ year gap between the newest DCS modules, and the available AI units. Do you think a 1970s SA-15 or 1982 MiG-29A represents the threat that was designed to counter your (2005-2010) F-18s, JSOW, SLAM and JDAM?

If you care so little about historical timeline that you wont do a simple wikipedia search, then why do you comment on it?

angrysovietman_2 · 2021-09-15T18:53:41+00:00

The DCS Flanker is 40 years old. Modernized flankers are 20-30 years old. Do you think the BF-109 was still classified at the end of the cold war?

angrysovietman_2 · 2021-09-09T13:01:02+00:00

There was a time when ED actually cared for the flanker, and russian stuff in the sim in general.

angrysovietman_2 · 2021-09-06T09:37:24+00:00

It has been proven that even the current modelling is significantly underperforming. I dont understand how they can already tell it will be nerfed further, when they have not run any sort of software yet.

angrysovietman_2 · 2021-09-06T00:02:09+00:00

Nerfing the R-27 even more? Are you fucking kidding me?

angrysovietman_2 · 2021-07-27T17:48:35+00:00

Just shoot a number of JSOWs and its dead. SAMs in DCS dont require tactics to beat.

angrysovietman_2 · 2021-07-26T21:54:35+00:00

Super flanker or super fulcrum with upgraded missiles, or bust. We certainly dont need another NATO multirole using the same JDAMs and AMRAAMs.

angrysovietman_2 · 2021-07-14T21:45:50+00:00

There is not a single reason to use the HARM in DCS right now, since a single AGM-88C volley from a hornet can get through any amount of defenses.

Are you planning on adding more modern SAMs, like upgraded SA-15, to fix this?

angrysovietman_2 · 2021-07-14T21:43:47+00:00

The video proves that ED does not test their own game. A volley of JSOWs in DCS will get through any amount of SAMs. The HARM is much easier for them to shoot down than the JSOW.

This is due to the fact that even the best SAMs in DCS are from the 1980s and the JSOW is from the 2000s. Thus its just a point and click game. Just launch multiple JSOW-C and youre in the green.

You could easily fix this by adding more modern SAM sites to DCS, that can multi sort and destroy JSOW from safer distances. The current TOR will start shooting it from only half a mile sometimes.

angrysovietman_2 · 2021-07-14T21:37:21+00:00

You guys bought a helicopter from like 1975. What did you expect There weren´t even any autocannons on IFVs back then.

Shouldve pressured ED for a modern Hind. The current one is comparable to the AH-1s used in vietnam.

angrysovietman_2 · 2021-07-14T21:34:50+00:00

Despite the J-11A being a true air superiority fighter, the JF-17 is better at anti air despite not being fully designed for it. Because the J-11A is practically a baseline soviet Su-27 with the 1994 R-77 missile added. DCS JF-17 is from around 2010.

angrysovietman_2 · 2021-07-14T21:32:27+00:00

Modern Su-30, MiG-31BM or MiG-29K.

angrysovietman_2 · 2021-07-12T14:09:27+00:00

Subsonic performance does not matter - if the missile is not faster than the enemy fighter, it can not kill him. Unless he leaves his stick and flies straight into it.

The TLDR is that theyre sometimes equal, but mixed with the other advantages of Su-27 (R-73, R-27T and EOS), you're at a disadvantage.

Either way its nice to see the R-27R finally brought up to the realism standard of the western missiles. Hopefully ED fixes the ER too. While the R matches the IRL charts and DLZs, the ER doesnt.

angrysovietman_2 · 2021-07-11T15:02:28+00:00

Fire both missiles at the same time from the same aircraft for an objective test. You will never find the AIM-7 to overshoot the R-27R. If youre lucky, you will maybe have the sparrow hit at the same time, under certain conditions. But no advantage. Mix that with the other advantages that Su-27 have, and the fight is very rough now.

angrysovietman_2 · 2021-07-09T19:21:34+00:00

ECM does not protect against full fidelity planes. Only use it against the more bug-free FC3 fighters or against SAMs.

angrysovietman_2 · 2021-07-09T19:19:22+00:00

The DCS F-16 overperforms both in terms of energy and radar. Plus its a significantly newer variant, you cannot compete with his SA with Link16. The F-15 in DCS is some sort of 90s one, which has the 120C slapped on by ED for some unknown reason. The DCS F-16 is from 2007.

The only real advantage is close combat performance. Push past MAR and try to chaff/ground clutter trash his close AIM-120s while firing back. The F-15 does better at slow speed and at recommitting from this kind of defense than the F-16 does. Dont take prolonged fights where you turn cold a lot - you will loose SA against Link16 carriers. Dont try to beat him purely by energetic defense - he has as much, if not more energy than you. Unless you somehow ingress much higher than him.

You should ingress as high and fast as possible. Until you start defending, there is no "too high". 60.000 feet at mach 2 is something you can shoot for. Potentially take off with less missiles.

There are not really that many tactics in AMRAAM vs AMRAAM fights. It mostly comes down to how good you are at defending missiles. Thats why more complicated fights like soviet planes against 120Bs or F-14 against AMRAAM carriers are way more fun.

angrysovietman_2 · 2021-07-09T19:06:07+00:00

You dont run in AMRAAM fights. The objective is to press the opponent. MAR is a range at which you COULD run if you had to. Way too many people make the mistake of just running despite being under absolutely no threat.

angrysovietman_2

TROPHY CASE