1 Like
No change to consumption rate means it doesn’t need additional fuel time for any reason beyond the personal one you’ve been using. You assume there must have been a change to the aircraft (there wasn’t one) simply because you feel the need to bring more fuel now?
No, I don’t have it unlocked yet. I’ll get there eventually, you know, by grinding. Are you implying that people shouldn’t GE modifications and stuff tho? As in, they shouldn’t spend money on the game?
Once, and then stalled and has to regain speed whereas the F-18 can maintain 40° around the entire circle for example. Also, that’s not even true because there are 4th generation Western fighters with superior nose pointing capability at high speeds than the Su-27. The Su-27 can’t Cobra after a certain speed and the instant turn rate at high subsonic / supersonic is inferior to quite a lot of Western fighters.
My point stands, the theory on paper is one thing. The usefulness (lack thereof) in practice is different.
Funny you’d go “Aha! Got ya!” And still be denying the fact that you couldn’t demonstrate it’s usefulness in game.
1 Like
Why are you still crying about it? We moved on dude. Like I already said carrying 1-2 minutes is not a big deal.
Even though I am carrying lighter and smaller missiles. Aircraft should perform better.
Why not GE it like you did the previous Su-27 & not play it?
The SMT & the J-11? The list goes on.
No… I buy aircraft that truly interest me completely. However, unlike you I actually play them. You GE all new aircraft & only play them for 10 games & give up forever.
You pay money to talk on the forum & larp as a psuedo game developer, not by actually playing the game is what I am saying directly to you.
I won’t engage in whataboutism. What tactics pilots and operational groups employ today is beyond my knowledge and clearance level.
Firstly, Russia has its own propaganda that has been annoying to sift through when researching history. It’s already bad enough I have to sift through the U.S and others as well to find what is fact. Korean war, as far as I understand it, was fairly even in kill numbers between Russian and U.S. pilots despite U.S. having higher numbers if we include Korean pilots. Vietnam was a U.S. failure to understand Bombers and nuclear weapons do not work to win conventional wars. Even if my research is limited to works published in English, I have enough tact to understand what Nations did well and did poorly in conflict.
1 Like
Is it just me or the img doesn’t load?
No, the image is present
2 Likes
Just loaded.
You never conducted a coordinated attack on an enemy’s life? That’s a good thing.
Then you will never understand what combat is & what it does on the psyche. Technology is not to be relied on to remove all aspects of combat. The US has made this very clear in many documentation, studies & current doctrine.
Dogfighting will remain an inevitability now & into the future. You have no right to dictate what is useless or not in this specialized form of combat.
Yes but not for the reasons you listed
You already know why, I can test fly it and all it does is add some ordnance?
I don’t “give up forever”… I still play the game just not random battles. Once I’ve got the relevant modifications there’s no point to playing game modes I’ve had 16,000 hours in over 12 years and gotten bored of.
Well that’s just a whole lotta pointless opinions… Yes I’ve paid money for things I know I’ll enjoy… that’s kinda how life works for the most part. Also, anyone can develop games… I think you attacking people who actually help improve the game is kind of silly when you claim to want the game to be better.
Well, I hope you get back in the game one day.
Well, regardless of it does not perform better.
So let me know when you find out why it’s not better than the Su-27S in game though it is technically lighter & more aerodynamic carrying smaller & lighter R-77s as opposed to large & heavy R-27ERs of the previous Su-27S.
In the meantime, I will play actual game battles in it the way the developer has designed it to be played.
This is entirely wrong.
Vietnam was an unconventional war. The US lost because its conventional approach which dragged on to the point of withdraw. This is the same for the Soviets in Afghanistan.
The North Vietnamese fought asymmetrical warfare that employed guerilla tactics, covert small units & ambush tactics. They did this on the ground and in the air.
The US does not gain knowledge by solely winning wars, It by spilt blood. Same for the RuF they are only adapting.
The whataboutism is about what pilots do under pressure. I am not a pilot, I have no basis to speak for their training and actions.
You should also go by that you don’t know what pilots will do in combat situations. I certainly know you and I have zero relevant knowledge of what pilots will do given specific scenarios.
In the game, I certainly can. In real life, I definitely cannot and have to rely on physics, theory, precedence, and practicality to form my opinion.
In game, using extreme AoA (cobra) is rarely helpful. However, since most are bad at controlling their closure rate, having the Su-27 bleed so much speed makes it very easy to get kills with it, despite being the size of a barn.
In real life scenarios, I do not see the Cobra being useful outside of desperate scenarios. Considering that fighter aircraft often do not fly on their own, the cobra would see even less relevant use.
Because it’s not easy switching back & forth in controls while preparing a fire solution at the same time with 16 others spamming missiles.
You know spamming missiles in condensed furballs & flying Mach 1.20 on the deck is not a real thing right?
There is not a cobra button to combat the fictional performances in game.
Condensed furballs with 16 dudes flying circles around each other is not the way 4th generation aerial combat goes down, I hope you are aware…
That is some WWI biplane & lesser extent WWII battles that WT is still modelled after.
The game will get more realistic now there are ARH. So do not be discouraged.
I am excited going to play now.
The U.S. was unable to use nuclear weapons upon which it built its doctrine at the time. Everything was to be a bomber, everything would be fought with nukes. The use of conventional weapons was not emphasized, yet Vietnam needed to be fought with conventional weapons. The ground war was unconventional, yes, but that’s not what I’m referring to with “conventional war”. It is, from the Air Force perspective, a conventional war, it has always been referred to as such since only conventional weapons were used.
Congratulations, you have found the problem with using it in real life scenarios, this is exactly why I criticize it as such. While not on the same scale as War Thunder, the problem still exists in this way, even with just 2 opposing aircraft.
OMG this is terrible. Who told you this?
You know that would defeat the entire purpose of assisting the Republic of Vietnam (SVA) in the first place, right?
You think the USSR & US lost in Afghanistan because they were unable to use nuclear weapons? Lmfao.
You think we should have used nuclear weapons in Korea too? Our poor allies.
You can use a macro with the current control schema to easily set this up.
Press the switch controll type key to cycle through the mouse, realistic, sim controlls.
Or
On key press > switch to sim controlls
On key release > switch to mouse controls.
I have it set much better than you my guy.
There is not a one button solution dude. You are wasting my time now.
Then don’t create conversation you have no interest in discussing.
If you have a preffered setup, that’s your thing and you could share it if you so wish.
But if you are just going to berate and belittle because you think you are superior then there is nothing to be gained by further conversation.
It was irrelevant to the premise of the conversation. Its not easy to use supermaneuvrability in game nor is there a one button solution.
Additionally, aircraft overperform in game completely beyond reality. The only thing that is actually held back within the bounds of reality is Supermaneuvrability.
The speeds they are limited & consistent while aircraft like the F-16 can hit 15+ G at above Mach. Not that I disagree with the FM of the F-16…
My point is that the ability to “cobra” is more realistically modelled than the entire flight envelope of the F-16 in WT.
Anything else you would like to add? Being as I am the only thing that summons your interest in the Su-27?