Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
SSerponi has another perspective. We are all changing. Keep an open mind. Su-33s can be lethal...
If you use VR you will more appreciate FC3 Planes due to harder access to side panels and we like to view our Pilot. Sure you can go Hi-Fi also but you'd need to bind lots of those or use your Mouse which I hate. In this you also get the J-11A (Chinese Su-27) which also carries the R-77. I really enjoy all 3 Flankers right now and the R-27ER has been improved more so to better even the R-27ET (heatseeking and needs LA to fire even within early ranges) range and speed. The only benefit the R-77 has is going pitbull as it's Fox3 which is a real winner whilst you evade incoming Missiles.
The Su-33 is less responsive to manoeuvre but has other tricks: it's faster, carries 12 Ordinance, has ASC Refuelling Mode for great stability instead of Auto-Level (it's not by AutoPilot for Reset), plus has AutoThrust which both are great for Formation Flying also (which is AutoPilot for Reset).
I would not Buy the single Module but wait for a discount for FC3. They all also have ASC for Cobra moves at only the last resorts too.
NOW THEN, it does have 1 more incredible bonus: Extra Afterburner which if used at great altitudes can Max Speed over 1500km/h from 10,000m to get vastly fast Missiles!
What you also get on these Flankers (and MIGs) is Stick Deflection to override the Fly By Wire slightly but enough to pull you into very tight turns to win Dogfights and save you from ground crashes! This honestly is a total cheat! It makes it feel very much the same as the US Planes do in normal flight but even greater turn rates (it's very arcade as you do not suffer any slide).
Just to remember though, you actually can avoid Missiles if you evade early enough (I corkscrew to keep a Lock On) but you are best to Fire first with Launch Override. The times I leave it late I will be killed. The R-77 can track well with Pitbull to kill with an early Launch. Or get used to a sneaky follow up R-27ET.
*Well said COXY
o7
If you are a totally new to a simulators, it's a good choice. But don't excpect to be a professional super-duper ace. You will be shot down a lot, especially with SU-33. Russian planes need a lot of practice. Just remember that AIM-120C missile can be avoided, it is hardest missile to avoid in this game, but it possible to avoid it. If you can't uderstand how to do it, check youtube air to air battle videos.
I am open-minded MacMan, I do like Su-27/Su-33 but I saw them as they are: lethal in close combat, outgunned in BVR due they lack a proper mid-range weapon.
I just told the OP that there are better planes in the FC3 package: Mig-29 for Russian and F-15C for Us.
For a started: flaming cliff 3 is the best, it's basically "Lock on modern air Combat" Content
You have 5 different aircrafts to test differents roles.
Su-27 & 33, Mig 29 and F-15 for Air-Air (mostly)
and Su-25 & A-10 for Air to ground
Great starter to get used to the controls, general feeling... and most of all realising what you prefer the most
(let's take my example: I thought A-A rox, A-G is lame when I started... then I tasted to the A-10... bought A-10C DLC not long after that... it is still my favourite plane... And I'm also having F16, F18 Mirage-2000 and Harrier)
The down side is that they're not as detailed as other "single plane DLC" : no clicking cockpit commands.
As we say in italy Grazie, Graziella e gazie al cazzo!
(Literally "Thanks, litte Grace and thank you to the ♥♥♥♥!", I know, that does not sound really meaningfull when translated).
War is not about playing fair or with the same weapon as the enemy (the knights times have ended lot of time ago).
Nowdays war si about having a longer and better stick than your enemy one, and possibly being better at using it than him.
There is no Ehhhh, but if you dont' use amraams... , have the possibility to use them so I use them.
You can't do the same? Your problems, not mine.
Adapt, and find a strategy to counter or play the target role.
Deal with that bro.
Btw,there are no "SPAMRAAMS" or other "1 shot = 1kill" weapon in this game: you can evade every missile using the appropriate defensive maneuvers and contermeasures. It is just a matter of training and skill.
F-14 was introduced in 1974 (A+/B upgrade started in 1987)
F-15 was introduced in 1976 (C types started flying in 1978)
F-16 was introduced in 1978 (C types started coming in 1984)
F/A-18 was introduced in 1983-84 (C types started coming in 1987)
Su-27 was introduced in 1985 (officially entered service in 1990)
Su-33 was introduced in 1995 (officially entered service in 1998)
F-14, F-15, F-16 and F/A-18 eat flankers for breakfast, despite being older (yes, they're ALL older).
Also, flankers were designed to fight F-15s and F-16s.
As for the amraam, it was introduced in 1991...the Soviets started working on the R-77 in 1982, but the missile wasn't introduced until 1994.
All in all, your claim that flankers are "being thrown into combat online against aircraft that are almost 20 years advanced into the future" doesn't seem to be the case.
Su-27 and Su-33 don't use the R-77 for whatever reason (maybe it was decided to only make it available for the fulcrum and later Sukhois, like the Su-30, etc.), but it's definitely not because the planes were too old.
And there's also the FC3 factor... I doubt real flankers and fulcrums are forced to rely solely on STT locks for missile employment (they also have upgraded avionics package, etc.).
This isn't a aircraft balance issue, this is a issue with understanding the doctrine that these aircraft were placed into. Your average DCS public server scenario isn't going to encourage players to actually learn the doctrine of the Russian air force or the USAF/USN. In the end, those scenarios just boil down to team deathmatch with only a loose tactical framework surrounding it all.
Let's say that someone were to put forth a realistic scenario on a public server (and let's also assume that your average public server player will actually join in). That scenario would probably look a lot different than what you are used to. The Redfor side of the map would have a pretty extensive anti-air network that includes everything from long-reaching S-300's to the scattered Shilka and Zsu-23. There wouldn't be a lot of room for players to hug the ground and hide in mountain passes because there would be MANPAD, SPAAG, and even IR SAM fire almost constantly coming at them if they do that. Likewise. Any foray into Redfor airspace would have to involve skilled SEAD and DEAD flights that can help clear the long-range SAM threats so that the "overpowered" Bluefor aircraft can actually operate without getting shot down.
On top of that rather massive IADS you would have a bunch of players in MiG's and Sukhoi's patrolling their airspace and working well inside their IADS network. It wouldn't be heroic and it wouldn't be super exciting in the Hollywood kinda way but it would keep the aircraft alive and would more closely match the defensively focused air doctrine the Russians have been using for a long, long time.
On the Blufor side, you would have IADS setups but they wouldn't be as extensive. Instead, you would be relying on proactive "offensive counter-air operations where the goal is to strike at aircraft while they are still in their hangers. That way, you can just cut paths through the air defense and work the airfields.
This will always be a problem with DCS. At its core, it will always work best when you meet it half-way in regards to scenario realism. When you try to shoehorn realistic aircraft into a competitive PvP "air quake" scenario, you are inevitably going to run into problems because real airplanes are not built with any sort of balance in mind. They are built to suit the doctrine of a given nation and if you want best results with them, you need to actually understand that doctrine and play scenarios that allow for the use of that doctrine.
You do realize that the R-27 (even the ER version) is way less maneuverable and has less energy than the SD-10, right?
Even with the higher maneuverability and speed, GS had to get within 5nm in order to get a kill with the SD-10...
If GS had attempted that final close range shot with an R-27 (which would've been required, since the eagle was too fast and low for anything else), it would've been impossible for him to keep the bandit locked while defending that last amraam.
Thus, the R-27 would've missed and he would've been killed by the amraam all the same.
I've fought and killed very experienced flanker pilots in similar circumstances, simply because, unlike them, I'm not required to keep the lock all the way through.
Is there something specific you want to add about that? I was speaking more about doctrine and how different nations employ weapon systems/platforms based on said doctrine. I wasn't speaking so much about pilot training specifically.
I am becoming tired of writing about the very same subject:
https://steamcommunity.com/app/223750/discussions/5/2915472677728241763/?ctp=3#c2915472677723659890
P.S. And my comment was not specific to your post above, which btw it was well exposed.