gaijin casually nuking the skill floor to bedrock for no reason
8 Likes
Add literally ANY other type of IFF except this gaijin come on.
1 Like
Literally doing anything but what we are asking or want as a community.
2 Likes
Just add STT iff please
No one asked for this
4 Likes
new gemini entertainment dropped
Iron dome destroyed the top tier SIM gameplay.
BR brackets are so messed up now that a 13.7 planes like f16 ADF with 6 missiles, no HMD, no ground armament faces planes like SM2 with AESA radar with 12 fox3s.
And now this.
Gaijin do not care about SIM game play and it just shows every step of the way.
With every update, they make things worse (somehow).
The game becomes unplayable with every update.
Thank you Gaijin.
1 Like
Dont forget props is almost entirely ruined from bomber damage models ❤️ why not ruin that last remaining BRs while they are at it.
5 Likes
This is terrible. But I’m so playing the J-7E, the Alpha jet TH, the AMX’s and the Kfir C. 7 (now one step above Kfir Canard with 4xPython3) once this is implemented and abuse them like hell before at least the TH will go up in BR.
1 Like
Such external markers beyond 800 meters have no business being in Air Simulator Battles.
While high tier Air Sim DESPERATELY NEEDS better IFF and even Datalink, this implementation is just too immersion breaking.
A much better solution would be some form of ‘makeshift datalink’, such as displaying friendly unit markers on the map view out to perhaps 50km or even 100km (or to how far away the aircraft Radar or RWR can detect, whichever is the longest range).
This feature should be exclusive to aircraft that have either a RWR or a Radar capable of IFF, until Gaijin is able to properly add a definitive ‘datalink’ parameter to most aircraft that have/had such a feature.
There is also the A-10A, Su-25T, Su-25SM, one event Jaguar with Magic 2s, F-111F (AIM-9Ls), AV-8B NA, and Thai F-5E/T with Python 3.
I also think that MiG-23s will be busted when using the R-23T/24T + IRST (I wonder if Flankers and MiGs with R-27ET + IRST would potentially be as broken)
Well, here we go. I’m going to try to present a perspective I’ve always advocated. So, I’ll share a critique, a neutral point of view, and a suggestion.
Experienced players tend not to notice how often beginner players rotate their deck and always view their preferred playstyle through the lens of their own 10,000 hours (lol) of flight experience.
I agree that the mechanic is bad for me, given my own experience; however, this mechanic is excellent for beginners—yes, it’s good from that perspective.
How many, many times have we spent minutes and minutes waiting for a match to reach two players on each side before the round could begin? This will help improve player turnover.
My suggestion is that this mechanic be granted only during the first 20 matches for a player who has just started. For example, there should be a hidden counter that sets this assistance for newbies, even if it’s only in the “Nuclear Thunder” simulation.
That, my friend, is what’s called inclusion.
Oh yeah the Jaguar IS. I got it and it’s 11.3 I think. But so is the lowest JH-7 which is much better than the Jag.
And yeah the MiG-29 will be broken as hell, even the 12.3 (!) variant with R-27T as you can go radar silent and lock from far far away.
Oh and don’t forget the Sea Hawk premiums and the SAAB-105Ö!
The only thing I think is really needed for markerless gamemodes is better quick messages. At the moment, the standard is “follow me” which pings your location on the map. But people might not know what that actually means.
So instead it could do with something like “Friendly Check” or something like that, something much clearer, and if someone is within 2km or so, you get a popup like you do when someone helps with repairs to say thank you that responds.
Done, simply, clean and reasonably realistic
1 Like
But it’s reasonably not realistic to expect that they would improve the game mode. That would also cause them pressure then fix all the accumulated issues. It’s so much easier to just pretend that sim doesn’t exist.
2 Likes
Unfortunately very true
2 Likes
it’s fallacious to assume that inclusivity is intrinsically good. inclusion by definition includes experienced players. they will always benefit more from any information tool than an inexperienced player.
but the core issue here is that this form of iff does not serve to even approximate any real system which is a pretty fundamental premise of simulators.
2 Likes
have a rough estimate marker of a teammate on the map like they’re radioing their location in from time to time or something
or let players radio their position on the map from time to time on a timer with a fade out marker
that would be the best solution
1 Like
Thats a very reasonable compromise.
My main thing is we have so many sytems of IFF that could be implemented, yet this is what was done. Theres just so many more options out there. It doesnt need to be a one size fits all…
1 Like
i don’t see enough people talking about how sim is lacking. its genuinely not even playable with how bugged some older huds are for example no iff or marker on f16cm hud, no proper mfds, no proper nctr for planes such as the f15ge and f18e and almost any plane that has nctr, even the huds themselves are not realistic on palnes such as the f16c which we know so much about… and don’t even get me started on the new f16 hmd its genuinely stupid!!
1 Like
And most HMD’s are bugged in VR…
1 Like