please Ty
I think if we could dynamic decelerate and recover quickly (as you even mentioned its lacking) the Mig29 would be damn near perfect.
1 Like
Gaijin has the instructor limit available AoA so that the aircraft doesn’t stall when you are using max elevation pitch but they also give a bit of overhead so that it doesn’t dump energy either.
He wants to be able to pitch without SAS dampening like you can in full real but in mouse aim. IMO just switch to full real.
1 Like
AIM-7M is (as far as my testing has gone) guaranteed to miss below ~95m vs a non-maneuvering target in-game, worse if they are maneuvering seeing as at 95m alt, the missile doesnt hit, it simply gets close enough to proxy and afaik, all missiles have similar/the same multipathing for "balancing purposes…
- That’s idiotic “balancing”, as it has the unfortunate tendency of nerfing aircrafts that rely on radar missiles while buffing those that have superior dogfighting ability. The whole reason BR’s exist is for balancing, stop kneecapping capabilities for the sake of bad players or trying to force a vehicle into a BR it doesn’t belong in
- This is horrible for gameplay, and is the single most defining cause of the top tier meta, as you can always make it to a near neutral merge as their radar missiles are completely useless.
- Specifically in the case of the AIM-7M, the stated minimum altitude is 5m according to documentation, and it has a new fuze and directional warhead to remain effective at such low altitudes. the ~95m min alt seen in-game could be as much as a 1900% nerf to it in that regard.
The current implementation of multipath in WT is not only ridiculous, and bad for balancing, its horrendous for gameplay and lowers the high tier skill floor so much that its genuinly harmful for the implementation of future weapons and tech, since how are players supposed to cope with newer better radar missiles if they are literally never obligated to learn anything more than fly low.
The current state of multipath is arguably as bad if not worse than a severe exploit imo and harms everyone that flies at top tier
As for the relevance to the MiG-29, fixing multipath would make the R-27ER stronger, and would allow the SMT a viable and reliable spacing option against the F-16C they seem to struggle against so much and any player that doesnt respect it and take it into account
Edit: sorry for the rant, I initially wanted to confirm the original statement that SARH’s “always miss below a certain altitude” but kinda went on a bit of a rant about it because I truly believe multipath to be one of the biggest problems for top tier jets in WT despite players not really realizing how negative it is for the game
7 Likes
Agreed, but the Mig29s home field advantage is the point of stalls.
Going to set up my controls now to switch back and forth though we should not have to.
1 Like
I feel this, its a hassle to switch between four different modes when i only need or want 2. A more dynamic way to do this would be nice but unnecessary.
Well keep in mind players play console so that crap is hard af switching back and forth. Especially for the casual player who wants a Fulcrum experience.
The Fulcrum is getting chewed out because it has to play on the F-16Cs level. The Fulcrum must play the F-16’s game with no other choice.
1 Like
I play console lmao, though with mnk. Yeah the f 16s flight characteristics lend themselves to the instructor as it already has such a thing (flcs). Meanwhile the mig29 is unlimited by a fly by wire system but still needs to be limited in order fro mouse aim to work and be conpetitive
1 Like
I honestly think that is a dumb excuse on behalf of devs.
Who remembers when the Kfir C.7 was buffed (already been dropped back down). @MiG_23M. That thing was pulling insane alpha and post stall revovery.
I 1v1 @MiG_23M when it was first buffed and he tested both realistic and full real. I could not tell the difference.
I have a dumb amount of games in the Kfir and all of my kills are before the Python.
The Mig29 is fully capable of being allowed the capability without “destroying” the entire game as we know it.
1 Like
That was my go to move in the Kfir C.7 I would draw a tomcat on my six, wait till he gets close enough and pull max alpha and roll and gun him as he flies pass.
The important thing is that losing the restrictions on aoa would cause a overall damage on flight performance due to speed bleed excesses. The f16 attained its characteristic crazy rate by being limited to prevent such a speed bleed. the big problem with the f16 (imo) is having the capabilities as if it where controlled by a fbw system (as sources are the basis for its fm and the sources contain f16s with properly modelled fbw systems lol) but lacking it in game, allowing it to have the best of both worlds as its aoa isnt limited. However im kinda dumb and dont know much about this stuff, here to learn
Why must everything be one extreme or the other?
I bring up the Kfir because it had insanely high alpha at one point and still have the instructor operate perfectly find. No one is advocating for total removal for the instructor or “losing restrictions.”
The only aircraft that performed well similar to the alpha of a Mig29 at one point was the Kfir and J8B. That is no longer the case. Hell I didnt play much in the J35 but it was insanely high alpha upon release and you can dump your speed on a whim in Air Rb.
But it’s a perfect example of simply allowing more alpha do perform a dynamic deceleration or similar maneuvers associated with supermanueverability.
You were once able to drastically lower the airspeed with alpha before on lesser aircraft and maintain nose authority. It can and will be done in the future. This idea that it will destory the game of WT and have global ecological effects is unfounded and a typical GJ PR response.
The Mig29 is designed to bleed speed in excess and have the thrust to weight to back up a recovery or do it in the vertical.
That is the Mig29. Damage the FM? The Fake Mig29 FM? The “want to be” poser F-16 we currently have?
This game balance of “USSR needs an F-16, so let’s make the Mig29 act like the F-16” is wrong. Russians never had a fighter quite like the F-16 and the US never had a fighter quite like the Mig29. They both are very opposite.
Yin & Yang. Ebony & Ivory. Lugia & Ho-oh… etc.
2 Likes
Bwing slow makes it easier for you to be killed, and harder to flare/defeat kinematicly missiles. Currently the major strenght of the mig 29 is its speed and being able to engage and disengage at will (fm wise). It just cant make up for the speed loss of high aoa turns in time for it not to die to a 9m or r73 from one of 360 directions. Im not trying to refute your point, the instructor intends to mediate between high aoa and low speed bleed. It effectively tries to make it more f 16 like, your right. But there are problems. I have two questions, first how to implement the ability to do which ever maneuvers the mig 29 can do. And second, how to retain the competitiveness of the mig 29 in everday rb.
1 Like
current mig29 main problem imo is the f16 that thing overperforming, the blk10/15/20 not the blk50, cause they can beat the 29 in 1c without any problem, since they pull more AoA than the 29 with mouse aim and still for some reason retain more energy than the 29.
but that is for the mig29 9.12 and 9.13, the smt is another case, the smt is just bad tbh(for 1v1, for bvr it has the best radar and the r27er is just amazing), im not sure what can be done to improve him, i dont feel that the blk50 is overperforming, the smt is just a boat…
1 Like
I am of the same mind, however ziggy sees a problem and problems, if real, ought to be adressed. I am also quite interested in the thrust disparity thing that bbcrf brought up. But i do not require nor demand change to the fm. I dont want to talk too much, i dont have nearly the expertise mig 23 and ziggy have. And i hope that the two can thoughtfully and respectfully help each other figure out what does and doesnt need changing
im not sure what ziggy wants either, everyone kinda agree that the problem is the f16 not the 29 but for some reason ziggy keeps arguing with mig23m over and over, maybe the 29s can recieve small changes that will make them better but the 29 9.13 and 9.12 cant beat the blk10/15/20 (if both pilots are competent, not even in 1c) and the SMT will not beat the blk50.
Especially against the blk10/15/20, the only thing that can be done is to fix their FM.
2 Likes
This is the engine manual
What do you mean?
Yeah, but it doesn’t agree with the SMT aircraft manaul based on what Trickster said in his response.
I’m guessing the engine manual just assesses the raw thrust of the engines, whereas the SMT manual includes any losses in thrust from installing it to the airframe.
1 Like
The SMT manual is not online.That’s what the dumb Trickster points out. It is a mistake.So if you take the same manual and make the calculation manually, the thrust will be higher
1 Like