Giovanex got a theory that this happens because the su27 engines overperform while the model got too much drag, i think this is true because some ppl showed that the flanker can achieve very high speeds without its afterburner.
1 Like
I fly the Su-27 quite a bit, i know how it flies ingame lol. It doesnt have any issues in 1C, not in full real atleast. The only complaint i have FM-wise is that its a bit slow to regain speed like i said earlier, but not unmanageable either.
This is true but if you fly the f15a or the f16a in full controls you can also absolute destroy everyone else.
Squishface recently posted a video showing a duel that he had with a guy that claimed the su27 was a monster with full controls, although the skill factor matters a lot on these duels i recommend you to see his video, it should be interesting to watch
2 Likes
Do you guys think they made this just for the trailer? The shittiest patriot system can hit targets up to 70km range if i’m not mistaken, it would be interesting to see how they would put those in the current gamemodes.
At the end of the day theres always going to be a “best” aircraft, but the Su-27 isnt as terrible as people pretend it is.
Also, duels are a horrid way to tell how an aircraft tends to perform in real matches, as they are idealized situations that tend to be preferential to one aircraft over the other (gun duels tend to be preferential to 2C fighters for example). Also dont have any respect for squishface at all, tho he is a better pilot than me, hes a truly horrid person and a poor loser.
The models have existed for a while now, and now seem functional, as for if theyll be used in-game, idk, im hoping so though.
Seems like it, kinda figured it was gonna happen regardless, even if we had a solid source stating it didnt have any RWR, theyd just add it anyways and say its unplayable otherwise.
Considering that game modes including Anti-Radiation missiles have been leaked id imagine its for that.
Also, airfield AAA is in a really bad spot right now, it barely poses a threat.
1 Like
i mean, idk what gaijin was thinking of giving the airfield AA Roland 1 on the worst roland chassis in the game… It only has like 30 deg of elevation and is outranged by basicly any guided munitions ingame. Id much rather airfields have terrifying AA
I agree and i 100% know that if they improved these models the winrate wouldn’t change because the current meta is 80% about bvr duels, but i would like to see these aircraft performing better just for the sake of realism, like i would have no problem in seeing the spo 15 getting the issues it had irl implemented ingame.
1 Like
I agree but the issue i see is that like i said the shittiest patriot system can reach targets up to 70km in range, unless they artificially nerf the machine it would be super broken. However it can also mean a step on the overall improvement of air realistic battles like the addition of EC which would bring bigger maps, and i am 100% in favor of that.
1 Like
REDFOR doesnt lose cuz they suck at BVR, REDFOR loses because their players refuse to do any ground attack, and thats what wins games. Speaking as someone who’s been playing REDFOR primarily as of late, but also plays BLUFOR.
A single plane doing ground attack sorties can win the match in under 1h if not commonly intercepted, and with napalm being buffed, stuff like the Su-27, the F-16C and F-15C can all do very capable ground attack sorties without much/any impact to their air to air abilities.
On average, REDFOR players have higher KDR’s and higher kills per game, they just dont ground strike, and so they lose almost every game, and try to give every excuse under the sun as to why BLUFOR always wins.
This is clearly rage bait
13 Likes
Time to see if the SU34 gets thermals/a pod. T220 has been spotted on it a few times.
Not holding out hope on that one, though.
I’m actually fine with the winrate tbh, i just want to dance in the air with my flanker and my fulcrum
1 Like
I mean, thats fine, Im just not a fan of REDFOR players pretending they lose because the cards are stacked against them. BLUFOR aircrafts do tend to be better in top tier sim, but REDFOR aircrafts arent that far behind in air to air either. You could also argue that REDFOR just didnt have a good mixed role jet ever, but the Su-27, which is the backbone of REDFOR in sim atm, does just fine in that role.
REDFOR players cant expect to win the game if they arent even trying to do so, and blaming the aircraft is a cheap way to avoid responsibility imo.
Sim EC is won on tickets, and objectives bleed the most tickets, avoiding objectives and focusing purely on PVP like a lot of REDFOR players do just isnt a recipe for winning. Meanwhile everyone and their mothers complain about “zomber” BLUFOR players that arent that good but just grind bases into dust.
Try to beat my F-16C in any Russian top tier fighter once. Put the $$ where the mouth is, and no, I’m not talking about your behind… lord knows it’s jealous of what’s coming out your mouth right now.
11 Likes
…We literally have data that suggests that the Flanker is not conforming to the performance that it should have in real life. So you’re saying that we shouldn’t restore the irl performance because its “not terrible?”
The instructor pulling too much AOA is one part. The underperforming FM is another thing altogether.
8 Likes
No, i was asking for what the claims were based on because anecdotally it seemed to be performing as id expected it would. If its underperforming, fix it, but i just see a lot of claims and no sources, and respectfully, i dont attribute much to claims with no sources.