why do people still see big number on statcard and instantly assume its broken?
Tanks dont even render in further than 20km, which is the constraint all TV seekers have ingame. In the case of GPS weapons, any point further than 20km isnt actually locked on the ground, and even if it could, what would you be targeting? the tanks wont render in anyways; or usually have moved away by the time the glide weapon gets there in a minute or two.
The AJ.168 Martel missiles on the Buccaneer S.2B have a even higher range on the statcard (45km) than the Kh-38MT (40km) but nobody calls them “broken” because just like the Kh-38MT, they can not actually lock on to things further than 15-20km away.
Where did I say it would be broken? I said it was a cruise missile and that itd be nice if other countries got approximate analogues at the same time. This weapon is largely irrelevant for GFRB anyways, its more of a sim air weapon, as I already explained…
The Kh-38’s it has on the other hand, were already the best GFRB weapons in the entire game on the Su-25SM3, and the Su-34 carries more of them (6 vs 4) and is not a subsonic jet.
He is more or less a sim tourist who only occasionally plays sim in order to preserve the ability to post on the forums. And as someone who almost exclusively plays sim I do not care for people misrepresenting the current state of the game mode. This is actually probably the most common archetype of sim poster on the forums.
He is no different than the guy last week who was saying that the Su-27 flight model was better than the F-15A flight model and that the F-15A was actually a brick. And the depth of his sim experience was custom games and playing it for less than 5 games.
The fact of the matter is that the current Su-27 flight model is extremely limited by the way it’s drag is modeled in-game. People have gone about proving it in a dozen different ways and every time a bug report is submitted…it is hand waived away because of what amounts to a whim.
And it’s especially egregious because the metric where the Su-27 is underperforming is also a metric where Western aircraft are overperforming.
By definition it kinda is a “cruise missile”, though I guess the range is not quite that of other cruise missiles, it does vastly exceed that of any other weapons seen in-game.
couldn’t have said that better. Maybe “most western” since F-16C and F-15C are fine FM wise, but yeah the. What I don’t understand is why they have become so strict with FM bug reports compared to a year ago.
Well i think it’s kinda the same treatment that the phoenix got when they released it, “it’s a fox3 but it’s not”, i agree that it’s annoying that the other side doesn’t get a counterpart for it for fun reasons but the equipment doesn’t seem to be good, will have to look in the devserver to make sure tho.
Tbh, the GBU-39 SDB’s are gonna be the much bigger deal for sim i think, I was more going about it as a capabilities/fun side of things.
As it currently stands, I think the Su-34 will be superior in GFRB/GFSB as it has access to the Kh-38’s which have no counters among the GBAD seen in-game and can either be F&F or laser guided depending on the variant.
The F-15E on the other hand will be a monster in sim air due to being able to complete large amounts of ground objectives in a single sortie while also being quite decent in air to air, and having a nicer cockpit to work with.
If the Patriot/S-300 sites are added as objectives in sim though, thatd be in favor of the Su-34 as itd be the only jet in-game thatd be able to engage such types of long range GBAD relatively safely.
Was about to submit the report but just saw that you used wrong weight for the test: when adjusting mass with FM commands load out is already taken into consideration. If you set 18184kg the total weight will be 18148kg, not 18184 + ordinance.
750kg difference in an heavy aircraft like the Su-27 (especially at higher speeds) make relatively little (certainly not 7 full fat seconds) difference but devs will obviously answer that wrong weight was used
