I find that using the same buttons for normal control surface actuation and to add incrementally/trim just makes for a mess when you don’t want it to, you need a seperate combinations. I understand that many players simply play using keyboard keys and keep the mouse in relative control for fine tuning their aim, but i find that mouse joystick in standard mode (not simplified mode, that just works worse) can actually work very nicely as you can actually be really precise with the elevator and aileron inputs and it won’t restrict certain manoeuvres like mouse aim does. For turn coordination you simply adjust the rudder percentage according to the plane you’ll be flying, although i find that 100% aileron/20% rudder is a decent generic value, and jets equipped with SAS won’t need turn coordination at all in damping mode.
As for mouse controlling the radar hud, honestly i don’t see why disabling this feature in sim would be a dealbreaker. It was only introduced recently, it’s not something possible for pilots in real life since they have to keep their hands on the controls, and it’s not like controlling the radar with keyboard is particularly difficult or that different from using a joystick with a hat switch.
Nah, just award the J out as the kill to the launcher, or to the hostile fellow within sight range.
Forcing the fellow out should be considered as kill, to reduce the frustration.
A lost plane is a lost plane, even if it wasn’t directly tied to the combat loss.
Cursor keys are trim (5%) (mostly for dive recovery)
Mouse movement itself is analogous to a zeeo length stick (move to side and roll, move forward to pitch down)
It is a standard mousejoy not relative control. Combining roll and rudder limits you too much imo (can’t use rudder to kick yourself over, can’t use rudder to forward slip, can’t use rudder to recover spins).
One thing I did see others use (Rex, Steve_i400) was to make mousejoy x axis into rudder 100% and move roll to Q and E citing: “In props you want to counteract your prop intertia by applying -% rudder otherwise you losing turnrate, on horizontal turns it’s anywhere from 4 to 14% and similar on vertical once you get familiar with how it works. That’s why having precise rudder is way more important than having precise roll”)
I’ll stick with my rudder on Q/E and mousewheel as that’s what got internalized already and works pretty nicely.
I’d disagree on that last point personally. It’s not entirely because of iron dome, though it does play a part, its just because blue’s most prominent member, the US, doesn’t have any counters to the Eurofighters or SM2’s where they can just sit in the notch and fire off missiles.
All it takes in an even game is for one person to leave, then another will follow, then another, until you’re left with one or two people and it’s no longer fun for either team.
I don’t think gaijin understands how strong these ±90 degree radars are, couple that with better flight flight performance at higher speeds that the reds have currently and there’s just not much you can do.
1 Eurofighter + 8 F-15C is not equal to 9 Su-30 SM2. This is not a hard concept to understand. This is no different than US mains telling USSR mains to cope during F-15C meta spam because they could have Japan on their team.
The F-15C GE is not excellent. It’s so not excellent that the recommendation of how to play it from experienced sim player is to run to the airfield or use it as Golden Dome.
WarThunder Air Sim is not a realistic representation of BVR combat in the slightest. So this is also a moot point.
Upvote my bug report. It should to some degree fix the iron dome meta currently going around in ESA/PESA aircrafts.
"Why missile-on-missile lock is unlikely IRL:
Modern systems include several protections:
Track file correlation
The fire control radar assigns unique track IDs to each target. Missiles are tied to a specific track — not just “whatever radar return looks good.”
Seeker gating & Doppler filtering
Missile seekers use:
*Range gates
*Velocity (Doppler) gates
*Aspect filters
*Size/RCS expectations
Another missile:
*Is tiny RCS
*Has very different velocity vector
*Often outside the expected intercept basket
So it usually gets filtered out automatically.
Datalink target association
The missile doesn’t just free-scan like a mad-dog unless commanded. It looks where it’s told.
ECCM logic
Modern ARH missiles are designed to reject non-target radar sources, including:
Yes and? America Suffers ™? Play Eurofighter or Rafale then. Even F-22 won’t solve this.
USA doesn’t have a Gen 4++ to compete. Or gen 5. Not every nation has to be meta, or should be. They reflect the capabilities they have, that’s it.
Because that’s how you’re supposed to use it. It’s how it’s also used IRL. It’s a BVR machine, much like the Tornado ADV/F.3
The IRL doctrine defines the design of the aircraft. Like I said, you can mald about WT being a game all you want, but if you’re going to use IRL aircraft and performance and capabilities, then tell the USA to change doctrines so that Lockheed and Boeing can make something more fun for your playstyle.
This is a video game and is not a reflection of real life in the slightest. Games should have sides that are equally balanced and not just have 1-2 viable choices while everything else is just outright inferior.
This was true 2 years ago when Russian stuff was bugged and a poor fit for the game. It is equally true now that the roles are reversed.
Note how you cut out the other half. If a plane has to use SAM shield to be viable in the game then it is not a good plane in its own right. There is a reason you do not see hardly any Tornado’,s being played at higher tiers.
The IRL doctrine does not work in WarThunder. The capabilities that are modeled in WarThunder like notch gates are not realistic in the slightest. That is a good thing because realistic BVR combat would just kill off top tier as a game mode anyways.
The solution to the problem is to not play. Excellent suggestion and definitely constructive feedback.
They are equally balanced. The vehicles and armament differ in employment. Just like playing a P-51 vs Zero, different vehicles and weapons favor different employment styles.
that’s your opinion
Citation needed, got any documents that detail that data?
The great thing about war thunder is that you’re not forced to play top tier if you don’t like the gameplay.
The solution to your problem surely is. Arcade-fying the mode for sake of USA Suffers ™ is not a solution.
Watching this video gave me an aneurysm. Being at 30k+ft less than 20 miles from a target and mach jesus into his direction and saying the problem is the plane… using 120A and complaining about no off-bore capability… and then saying the only way to play it is iron dome…
it’s like flying a P-51 on the deck and turning with a zero… bro… come on.
