there is actually a really nice picture of the Striker 2 symbology there as well
1 Like
nice
(i personally prefer the striker 1 symbology tho)
Its probably an indicator for how far off screen the contact is. As you adjust your head towards it, the number of arrows would decrease
red is rwr targets
and yellow ones are friendlies, going of how it is on the striker 1
maybe @Gunjob knows more
We shouldn’t have to deal with it. Ever since they closed the kh38mt thread I stopped spending all money on the game. I will not support this company financially anymore.
2 Likes
I played a “Best of 19” series with a friend. The Typhoon vs. the Su-30SM2. Our skill is more or less equal, so it’s usually the aircraft that makes the difference.
The score was 10-9 in favor of the Typhoon.
At long range, the Typhoon is comfortable, but as soon as the range decreases to about 10 km, the advantage shifts sharply to the Su-30, since the R-77-1 and R-73 can attack at an angle of 90 degrees+, while the AIM-120 and AIM-9M cannot. Plus, it’s a bit harder to turn and escape from the Su-30SM2, since the Su-30SM2 is noticeably more powerful than the Su-30SM. And the plane’s unstable behavior at altitude is incredibly annoying. It’s not even the FM that’s causing the problem, but the instructor. It wobbles much less with full control.
Overall, the situation is much better than I feared. Because at one point I was like, “Oh, screw this patch.” But in any case, in long-range combat, the Typhoon either plays out due to the equal number of missiles (Rafale, J-10С) or the lack of them (Su-30SM/SM2, F-15C GE, F/A-18E).
Unexpectedly, the R-27ER turned out to be a real pain in the ass. Because of the possibility of reconnecting the datalink and resuming tracking, you have to break lock at the last moment and also abruptly turn off the trajectory. And either split-s or Immelmann, because turning in any direction will break the notch and reactivate the lock.
P.S. A question arose: do we currently have top-tier aircraft (14.0+) with pylons that are ONLY suitable for strike weapons? Don’t mention the F-15’s CFT pylons or the central fuselage pylon. Apparently the engineers at Eurofighter GmbH are dump and don’t know that additional air-to-air missiles can be mounted on the pylons. :D 4 “empty” pylons are somehow unreasonable.
the only one I can think of off the top of my head is the inner wing pylon on F-16s, which is cleared for bombs and other ordinance but not missiles
10-9 is wild shouldn’t even be a competition.
Shows we need new missiles.
Typhoon vs Su-30 should be like a F-15 against a Tornado F.3 an easy win 95% of the time.
Is the 250°/s still lost? fixed?
To be fair, my first two deaths were a failed RWR (the R-77-1 flew in in absolute silence) and a failed DASS (the R-27ER was not detected by Doppler radar. Both the DASS and the Captor-E were unnoticed).
Overall, I think the ability to launch the AIM-120 without launch angle limitations would greatly benefit all aircraft using this missile. Because, damn, that’s stupid. A missile that doesn’t lock onto its target before launch somehow has the same limitation as one that requires lock-on before launch. I might be misinterpreting the logic of the proof, but you have to prove presence, not absence, right?
The second option, less realistic (right now), is the ASRAAM. Dueling firefights at ranges up to 40 km are quite its forte. As I mentioned above, ALL the parts for this missile are already in the game, just in different missiles. And you can simply not implement (for now) a powerful seeker head - if I’m not mistaken, that’s what they did with the Magic 2.
2 Likes
Kind of the issue
In Gaijins eyes Su-35 will be superior to anything NATO can produce.
Gaijin don’t understand like the F-15 these legacy 80s designs can only be developed to a point.
2 Likes
The scan speed nerf is confirmed to not be a bug. The devs “don’t believe” the E-scan rate and set it to the 190/s M-scan rate so we just get screwed ig.
7 Likes
Which is one of the funniest things ever. The SU35 and its predecessors are not bad aircraft by any metric. But they are definitely not superior to anything NATO can produce.
I am also not saying the inverse is true, where the sukhois are garbage and a single typhoon can wipe whole squadrons from the sky.
Simply that, if anything, these aircraft would be level.
Realistically, an airframe that is aproximately 10 years younger, and had more money thrown at it, and was developed by a whole bunch of world renowned systems and aircraft development companies. should most likely be better than a jet where there was less money involved, with older tech. (even if you account for the obvious monetary inefficiencies that come with multinational bureaucracy)
4 Likes
how so ? meteor would break the game. unless they add more missiles n bigger maps.
Honestly, if they’re anywhere near as easy to dodge as AMRAAMs are (they will be, because gaijin will probably just copypaste the seeker like they did 120C), METEOR will change literally nothing as 16km warning is more than enough.
2 Likes
how so? How would a, basically, longer range AMRAAM break the game?
you can say the same for everything then aim120d/pl15/pl17/r77m/r37m everything except mica ng. cus they all have the same seeker head performance
The most accurate copy paste would be a MICA seeker
METEOR uses an improved METEOR MICA seeker