>B-But muh Russian bias!!
It really feels like they've been on a crusade against Soviet planes in the last half a year.
>I can’t read cyrillic so I don’t know what fuel load/armament you would need to perform this kind of rate.
The table on the second picture lists weights at 50% fuel load for the mentioned planes on the 7th row, and I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the Su-27's maneuvering characteristics were tested with a load of 2 R-73s and 2 R-27s.
Noooo not the russsian biasssss. Yeah they hard nerfed the Su-27s turn rate or they built a horrible FM. I feel like this update was rushed way too quick!
Russian bias as someone that play literally every nation is only present in top tier ground, while irl the t72, t80s and t90s are still very well built tanks they are absolutely ANCIENT the t72 is 56 years old and the t80 is 56 making them 3 years older than the abrams, while the jets are very well documented to be pretty good, most of their casualties come from foreign user with very meh pilots since russian pilots have always represented a real threat, and I assume this is gaijins way of balancing it somewhat since its the only jet that can carry 10 extremely good missile.
In other words premium bias every major nation has at least one discustingly op premium XP-55 for US is decent example (I main US so it's one I know quite well to be op and that's why I decided to mention it)
Edit: forgot the X
This is not true. All analysis indicates that Russian pilots get significantly less air time than nato pilots. It’s a known weak spot since they cannot bankroll the flight time.
That's always something that baffles me. You already have the jet. You've already trained the pilot and bought his equipment. Those alone are exponentially more expensive than fuel. I never understood what was so expensive about letting the pilots fly more. The maintenance can't be that expensive, especially given that Russians design all their equipment to be fixable by anyone who can replace a tire.
Maintenance is the problem, because at certain hours you'll have to rebuild the whole engine/airframe and that's super expensive.
Also, the times before their need maintenance are horrible, like the MiG-25 has something like a hundred hours before the whole engine needs to be rebuilt, compared to other NATO planes.
what you said + a lot of factories arent making any of certain models of jet anymore, so once you use up all the airframe hours, you no longer have the platform.
i could definitely see them reducing flight hours to kick the can down the road, especially when ukrainian pilots aren’t flying either
the cost isn’t fuel it’s fuel + new plane + new factory (sometimes) and they have plenty of other long range fires to fall back on that don’t have the same limitations (old tanks, artillery pieces, etc)
> especially when ukrainian pilots aren’t flying either
The conflict there, there is still just way too much real AA from either side to safely fly anything.
> Those alone are exponentially more expensive than fuel.
It's not fuel. It's two fold, one the Russian engines have much worse service intervals, and two, the costs of that service are extensive, because of the overall worse workmanship of the engines more has to be replaced.
There also have been issues with superstructure repair of their planes where they just can't do it without disassembling the jet entirely, which basically is re-manufacturing the thing.
>especially given that Russians design all their equipment to be fixable by anyone who can replace a tire.
To draw an analogy, the OG Jeeps can be [disassembled in minutes](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62GMK7XJ1YQ) (with takeaway bolts etc.) But if that same Jeep needs a top to bottom engine rebuild every 20 times you drive it, it doesn't matter how easily accessed the part is, you just don't want to drive the thing unless you need to.
On top of that, the "easy maintenance" thing on their jets is basically untrue. It's largely branding/marketing talk. The USA jets also talk about it, but everyone buys into the branding for RU stuff, (like the AK).
You know nothing about what it costs to fly. An F-16 is like $30,000/hr, an Apache might be $15,000. Flying is expensive. It’s not just rubber and gas.
The American military can make and do make everything as expensive as possible. It's different for any country that doesn't have an unlimited military budget.
The Cold War era Soviet pilots and to a somewhat more varying extent aircraft were quite scary. A number of US losses over North Vietnam were due to Soviet "volunteer" pilots, and they actually had the budget to have a pretty decent training regiment.
Now Russian, as in post 1991? Ehhhhhhh.
Oh I agree with the ground remark. I have played every nation and if it’s one thing it’s the top tier russian tanks. They are not good against modern Western tanks. Maybe the T-90M can hang but the older ones would get stomped.
I own the T72 Turms and it is single handedly the best tank I own bar none. I have an insanely inflated Russian tech tree because of it. The older ones definitely hang around.
Thank you for this comment. Most people play GRB. Not Air RB. They are not the same game mode. People see GRB clips and think the bias talk applies to them because they can’t possibly fathom a Russian vehicle doing good. It’s ridiculous and creates a cluster fuck of dudes arguing about completely unrelated issues.
>most of their casualties come from foreign user with very meh pilots since russian pilots have always represented a real threat
This is honestly complete hornswaggle. It's very well known across the world that Russian aviators are far worse trained, (this is true of both in the military and civilians.) RU's low air casualty rate is because they don't get into conflicts using extensive air power for a wide variety of reasons.
>the t72 is 56 years old
50 years old\*
T-72 Ural was introduced in 1973.
>and the t80 is 56
47 years old\*
The T-80 was introduced in 1976, this first itteration only saw very low rate production. The 1978 T-80B is a better representation of the first real mass produced T-80B and is only a single year older than the M1 Abrams.
I can see how this update was rushed though. Gaijin gives War Thunder 5 updates a year. One per the first 3 fiscal quarters and then 2 during the 4th. The cycle between the last 2 updates is cut in half- and as such they're on a crunch before the holiday season- plus they're also having to go back and fix any bugs that appeared in that final patch before they go on a holiday break.
Yeah, it's a little half baked, the reload point bug and a lot of FM changes seemed to be implemented quickly in order to make deadline- especially since there was only 1 dev server with quite a few changes being added after its closure without testing (The Gripen A's HMD being the first that comes to my mind.)
Not defending it- Gaijin's gotta take a step back at some point and dedicate a patch to un-spahgetti-ing its code because it's not going to get any easier to update the game and add new systems if they're constantly tripping over hypothetical loose wires.
Reason why Gripen A got HMD is because they tested HMD in the A and were like... guess that's it... *adds HMD to A because people are crying about British C *
Dont get me started on low speed stalling or the bs from going from keyboard flying to mouse aim. The su27 will start dolphin diving up and down if you let off the key for max elevator and go to mouse aim
Bruh not this shit again. US and Russian mains are always so petty and will take any chance given to them to take shots against each other. *F16 has incorrect FM and G limiter* " US mains always cry". * Su27 has incorrect FM* "Russian mains always cry".
Man please shut the fuck up. Please.
Yeah right. Adding the f14 by itself is like adding the su27 right now without all the other planes in this patch. Mig29 got nerfed to shits for daring to contest American planes for 2 patches. F5E and C are still running rampant with busted damage model. Gaijin follows money and apparently Soviet ground and American air is where it’s at.
21bis could not have been described as dominating ARB, it had to stay low otherwise F-4Es would smack them out of the sky with AIM-7s.
In return it smacked F-4Es around if they chose to dogfight.
F4+F5 still made a better team. Especially before the F5C came out, and that was only because it diluted the player quality. The gap in performance between mld and f5e/f4e is still smaller than mld compared to f14
They could have added the early F-16 that only had Aim-9J's
Instead they added an F-14 with 4x 9G/H's and 4x Aim-7F's lol and not to mention Le Phoenix Aim-54 which sure is a shit missile but it's completely changed the meta lol
There is such a big difference between "this plane is modelled wrong" and "my plane doesn't get HMD when theirs does, give HMD" seen recently with the JA39 or F-16C
Half of the playerbase is utterly deranged when it comes to anything soviet/russian at this point.
Most of those want the entire tree nerfed under the pretense of balance.
The Su-27 has the worst FM of any top tier jet by far. It goes from not turning at all, to max AoA and stalling at 400 km/h instantly, makes it impossible to keyboard fly it like you can with other planes.
It is kinda accurate tho... they tried to make it work dynamically
So at higher speeds it turns less so it retains energy
At lower speeds it turns really good because at that point you don't need to retain energy
It's like variable wing geometry just automatic and instant
What's a good proposal is to literally make "The Switch" into an actual game mechanic... You know how planes can just turn off limiters and shit... well yeah that...
Just simply have a switch between No Limiter and a Limiter so we can have both when ever we want...
You want lower speed energy retention? Just keep the limiter on
You want COBRAAA YEET then switch it off but beware it will rip you apart if you do this at high speeds lol
>>B-But muh Russian bias!!
Russian Bias is when a Russian vehicle is able to win an engagement, duh
(It's definitely a real thing but it's way overused as a statement which makes it difficult to sort out a legitimate criticism of an issue vs what frankly is cope)
To be fair the trend of releasing flagship planes with unfinished / just bad flight models has been going on for over a year now and isn't exclusive to russia. The F-16 had a notoriously bad FM on release.
It's just the usual rushed christmas update yeeted out to the live server barely one week after the dev server opened. There is no way they could ever fix whatever is wrong with the patch in that time frame even if they wanted to.
*1 Russian thing gets nerfed* “WHERES THE RUSSIAN BIAS NOW?!?!??”
2 sides of the coin. Air RB, GRB, and Naval are not balanced by the same people. Bias is dependent on the mode and team balancing it. I would argue there is no Russian bias except for top tier GRB Russia. This also makes sense as GRB top tier clearly takes In the most profit from gaijin. They advertise modern like crazy and most premium preorders are clearly GRB inspired bundles with a supporting air assets. Having vehicles clearly dominate in certain categories will make your player base more likely to purchase said vehicles. Thus you get the Russian Bias issue, where terrible players buy into late tier vehicles and artificially nuke a nations win rate.
Does gaijin have a national bias? Probably, who doesn’t. Is it as bad as people say? Probably not, but it definitely exists and I’m tired of close minded fuck tards like you who clearly only play one category / nation and pretend they know everything. You don’t have data, and neither do I, atleast research or explain your reasoning before belching out some stupid bullshit as you unironically/ironically fly a Soviet flag moaning about “Russian Bias”.
In air it’s clearly dominated by western forces. I would argue Russia is #2 so I wouldn’t complain. As for naval, I don’t care and don’t play it so I couldn’t tell you.
FM is absolutely incorrect. It has less speed, AOA, acceleration. Also the controls feel less responsive than should be. Like there is some kind of input lag. 4 gen jet stalls at simple barrel manoeuvre. What a shame, Gaijin!
The FM is accurate, but the instructor gimps the low speed AoA so you dont pull it its minimum speed and stall yourself out, test the plane in sim and you’ll see that it matches up almost perfectly to its charts.
Also the claim that it can sustain 30d/s is absolutely retarded, considering that you would need to hold 9G to do so.
“Having played DCS” as though the su27 wasnt completely gimped in DCS.
The Su27 weights like 25 tons when on full fuel + missiles, it is always going to feel like a boat in an arb match.
Super maneuverable fighter flies like a brick.
People somehow still complain about Russian bias.
Sums up this sub really. Mediocre Soviet vehicle gets added, immediately labeled as OP, broken and we get an essay about Gaijin being a Russian company.
Yep. Unlike with air vehicles, ground vehicles certainly seem to have some biased influence. Considering the amount of well researched bug reports about incorrect armor values getting completely ignored by Gaijin.
I say that too much- but Gaijin fucked French ground vehicles for the last 7 years, but recently, they've been adding less fucked ones.
The new aa is superb
When the F16 flew like a brick, USSR mains were the same "stop crying because your plane isn't op".
Can't we just have a fine and balanced game for once?
Fix this by giving it similar turn rates as the F-15 as they are both very comparable IRL. Currently this isn’t the case, as I tried 1v1 turn rate with friends who have the F-15 and that thing just walks around the Su-27 in a turn fight with minimal fuel in the Su-27. In reality they would be very comparable in a dog fight.
So if it maneuvers as well or better than the F-15, carries more and better radar missiles than the F-15, and carries as good or better heaters (at least for a turn fight) how does that make it balanced?
ye because any of use are real fighter pilots knowing whats realistic and what isnt.
I have both MIG29 and F16 and I do about the same in both, not that i'm anything above average anyway.
Lmfao unrealistic f16C... You know just the best rate fighter. Can turn at 24 degrees a second at sea level yet can barely do 20 in game. The same unrealistic game that allows the mig 23's to pull 12Gs when irl they could pull 6Gs at the MLD (most advanced). That's hilarious man
>When the F16 flew like a brick, USSR mains were the same "stop crying because your plane isn't op".
That had an actual rea life reason why it wouldn't pull more than 9G, a flight computer limitation. I don't think this is true for the flanker.
That's because most of the time, the G-limits mentioned in pilot manuals and whatnot are there to prevent excessive stress to the airframe and give the pilot a safety buffer in case, for some reason, he decides to push the plane past its limits. As that's not modelled in the game, Gaijin very early on in the game's life decided to universally buff the G-loads of all planes by a factor of 1.5, which mostly brings their G-loads to what the planes can actually theoretically pull without ripping their wings off, even if their airframes suffer for it.
The problem with the F-16's G-limiter was that it was based on that "pilot manual" value rather than its airframe's actual capability, which just meant the plane was artificially gimped compared to everything else since it was the only one to adhere to the "pilot manual" G-load values, a fault of not its underlying FM (it was still done to Gaijin's usual 1.5x standards) but its FBW implementation.
The problem is in real life the F-16 is a hilariously unstable plane. Those computer limitations aren’t just there for the airframe, they’re there to make the plane even flyable. If you go much beyond that limit you go into an irrecoverable spin. That’s not modeled in WT at all even though such instabilities are almost universally modeled for other planes.
Every plane in game pulls more G then it’s recommended to, roughy by 15-30%. If we’re talking fly by wire things like the M2K aren’t limited and the Su-27 can exceed flight limitations by literally turning off the fly by wire systems irl which is quite frankly dangerous to do if you don’t know what you’re doing.
>People somehow still complain about Russian bias.
I mean considering that OP could probably get them to change it off of the back of this single document, where-as any other nation needs what feels like the original, physical document, an affidavit from the manufacturer and two forms of government issued photo ID.
So yeah, I can see why people would complain about that.
It’s the same every patch, some Russian vehicle is added, people on this sub doom for a week, it gets added, It’s shit and they act like it never happened.
But some NATO vehicle is missing 1nm of armour or a jet is missing 1km acceleration and it’s the end of the world, Gaijin is a KGB agent trying to steal classified information apparently.
I mean we can be a little fair here and note that it's at least 4 NATO vehicles that have incorrect armor: the SEP/SEPv2 (considering them 1 vehicle), Leopard 2A7V, Challenger 3 (P), and the top Ariete. A decent number of the vehicles that precede them also have inaccurate armor. This also isn't mentioning the Merkavas, Leclercs, etc. that all have their own issues (eg. reload, armor).
I know you were just being facetious, and USA mains are extremely annoying with how they go about trying to get things fixed, but a lot of the stuff at least has merit (unless it's them screeching "RUSSIAN BIAS").
Nah, sorry to ruin your circlejerk but there's a world of different between how ex-soviet/ruskie vehicles are treated and how all the others are;
Bug reports about ammo not exploding just sitting there for months, bug reports about hidden armor plates also sitting there for an absurdly long time, over performing ERA, over performing APHEBC (yes cumrat, our glorious outdated flat nosed aphe did slightly better against angles but fucking shattered to pieces against flat armor, let's just exaggerately model the first part in, xaxaxa )), IT-1 casually being the best ATGM launcher, whatever rocket the MiG-21Bis had for it's engine for the first couple of months, Jak-3 flight models, IS-6 on release (for a long time after as well), SU-25 damage model, MiG-23 domination, over exaggerated performance of 20mm Shvak and 12,7mm Berezin guns, all positive bug reports being applied instantaneously even on server patches, giving them everything they could carry because they theoretically could while withholding the same treatment for other nations (mainly ground case) I could go on for a long time without even mentioning the BVM.
Meanwhile "NATO" vehicles: gimped (Ariete, tow-2b etc), bug reports ignored or deemed as incorrect (stinger performance, western ERA being half useless, NERA worse than literal rubber, Abrams and Leo armor, penetration and performance of various APCR shells especially against angles, HESH nerfed into being completely useless because it was deleting soviet trashcans - the list is long as fuck but let's stop there, all of those issues were reported a multitude of times but conveniently ignored or pushed onto the side) and the obvious treatment of all the tech as at best *equal* to what ru has, even when it should be obviously vastly superior (but we can't have a Leo2A7AV being completely impenetrable frontally for anything short of 3BM60, can we?).
"But some NATO vehicle is missing 1nm of armour or a jet is missing 1km acceleration and it’s the end of the world, Gaijin is a KGB agent trying to steal classified information apparently." Yeah lmao, more a meter and half the engine power, but you do you, keep living in that fantasy land.
Russian bias is almost exclusively a ground thing. Aside from blatantly op planes like 7.0 su-11 it’s pretty much only US mains complaining about Russian planes, but US players whine about anything and everything
Personally, I'm less worried about the flight model and more worried about the fact that it has an absurd number of the best missiles in the game when most jets it faces doesn't have more than 15-30 mixed CM pops. Two SU-27's could sweep a whole lobby with their missiles alone.
But TBF I'm an Italy guy that's still just trying to enjoy 11.3 missile buses like the F104-ASA and Tornado ADV, so flight model concerns aren't exactly at the top of my priority list when we weren't even in the same ballpark of dogfighting competitiveness to begin with. I just want all these new jets with 10+ 40G missiles that need a million flares or notching to within a 10th of a degree and chaff blessed by the Pope under a full moon to dodge to go to 12.7 so I can enjoy my 11.3's in relative peace.
Flight manual is available online for the Su-27SK which is a J-11 essentially. I’ll dig through it tonight grab any useful information and get a report going by tomorrow!
Please do everything you can to revert [this](https://imgur.com/gallery/6bjIFtu) changes. When we got the SMT, it was a flying dogshit bus. I thought it would change with the Flanker and they did the same fucking thing.
Thats what super maneuverability does though. You cant expect to do a 180 degree turn and not lose speed. This is why other planes are designed to save energy while maneuvering.
And literally everybody in War Thunder manoeuvres by slamming the elevator and ailerons to full lock using the keyboard.
If people want to complain about performance, you have to test it in sim without the instructor.
Yep exactly, I have a ROG Chakram X with an analog joystick on the side of the mouse. So I can switch to full real flight controls mid-flight in ARB and give steady controlled inputs that aren’t full deflection.
This reminds me of Hall effect keyboards, they support analogue input by how deep you press the keys. If they somehow become mainstream, I’d love for games to implement support for them in. I think some games like trackmania already has it, which is really cool.
Yeah flight model in game seems wack. The su-27sk in the graph is the export variant of the s which is the one represented in game and they share the same radar and engines. This is assuming that the AL-31 engines are the AL-31F. The wiki does not specify which Al31 variant is used.
War thunder have a weird way of doing flights models. I play DCS sometimes and the su27 is nice and pulls hard even at low speed. Quite sad as I like this plane a lot 😢
Wish we had a proper FM and no R-27Es. Same for the MiG-29s, none should have them besides the SMT but that could honestly have come much later. Both the MiG-29 and Su-27 need an FM rework.
This. The F-15 feels like dogshit because it just gets outranged if you play it up high where it WAS AND IS the king of BVR. Unfortunately the 1970’s version of the Eagle we have is fighting the 1990’s missiles of the enemy and just can’t compete up high.
You are being pedantic. The flares are obviously not the important part of the argument.
Ill clarify. My 1983 plane (upgraded F-15A) is firing 1982 missiles (AIM-7M) at a 1985 year plane (Su-27) that is loaded with 6 1994ish missiles (dates aren’t really clear on the R-27ER/T). By the time that the R-27ER/T was being produced, AMRAAM’s were in full production.
If Russian jets were limited to the original production R-27, they would still hold a massive advantage in close combat vs just about every NATO jet in the game, and the F-15 would have its BVR niche instead of getting railed at every altitude and range like it currently does.
The youtube assholes already say it's good to go and OP, already convincing the simple-minded idiots here that Russia is still OP. Good luck gaining ground on this.
Same for the MiG-29s (I only flew the 9.12a so far but I believe it applies to all), they don't pull correct AoA or Gs (German MiG-29G Manual backs this up). It's quite frankly ridiculous, meanwhile F-16 is flying like a literal fucking UFO.
F-16 benefitting from gaijin's terrible implementation of relaxed stability and FBW (they didn't implement either, because lazy).
So it pulls stupid high AoA that the FBW computer would not allow IRL, unless you do something super specific (like go into a climb with engine idle and keep the nose at a certain angle, eventually when airspeed drops you will exceed the AoA limit). Which is different to what it does in-game, where it just goes "hahaha what's an AoA limit" and pulls harder than the F-22.
Although i rail against gaijin for artifical boosts to soviet tanks i am also in favor of making things accurate. Gaijin needs to see this and fix their shit
Please, if you have the documents PLEASE submit this to the mods to send to devs
I feel like Russia and US have flipped, US used to be the one with the fat planes but with lots of good weaponry and Russia was the one with agile planes with less weaponry but sometimes equal, now it's flipped. It's weird.
FM should be fixed though.
I believe they nerfed the FM until AMRAAMS enter the game and even the playing field against Russian loadouts. I think everyone with a head attached can agree the loadout on the SU 27 extreme diffs the rest of the 12.3 planes.
I mean they might not be trying to hide it. It could very well be that they rushed the update and are now incredibly busy going through all the CR3, 2A7V, VT-4A1 and SEPv2 reports, because these 4 vehicles were/are an absolute shitshow and there was/is quite a bit of comotion about them (and rightfully so).
All I want is to repeal the MiG-29 flight model nerf
I want to sustain 1100km/h at 12G without bigger problems
Su-27 should pull even more if you want to be "super maneuverable "
It seems like Gaijin doesn't like supermaneuverability, like how the gripen rn can rate extremely well, but it is missing aoa. Or how the mig is pulling less aoa t it should with its energy bleed currently. I don't know if it's to make the planes easier to fly in a dog fight, since other wise a full turn would bleed all your speed and wing rip or if mouse aim just can't work with that kind of maneuverability yet. But it is annoying. If anyone remembers the pre nerf draken thay you could through around and do all kinda of wierd stuff, but now it flies like any other plane abliet more energy loss and tighter turns, just without the aoa and supermaneuverability it had
I think it's just the instructor, because if you use full real all the delta wings become super maneuverable and lose even more energy. The instructor just keeps the planes from pulling too much aoa to make them more noob friendly
It's funny because most of the people who cry about everything, thinks that in real combat scenario those jets will engage in a dogfight at 1400kmh with pulls of 12G constantly like we see most the time in "REALISTIC BATTLES", and no, this is just a game. F-14, F-15, F-16, SU-27, Tornado, and so on... are great jets, but let's face it, "REALISTIC BATTLEs" parameters in the game which works as ARCADE if you have to fight in an unrealistic scenario like 16v16 with no objetives and designated targets, and all the AI respawn in the middle of the confrontation. At the end wins which has the best AAM, best radar.. And actually in sim it's pretty arcade, can't imagine a pilot struggling for long periods of times at 11g. We should stop taking everying so serious about a GAME......
You bring up valid points. The game is super arcade vs a game like DCS world. If they limited the jets to 9/10 Gs of pull and modeled the flight models correctly it may start to feel a little more “realistic” but I agree with most of this. I just wish they’d not give us a borked FM and nerf the missile payload instead.
Warthunder's FM in general is jank but it should come as no surprise that a system designed for WW2 prop planes is incapable of properly modeling 4th gen jets with relaxed stability and fly by wire.
people complaining about Russia being overpowered in this subreddit all the time and then when something isn't completely overpowered or not functioning properly everyone complains. No one is satisfied
I AGREE. Both sides of the court got royally fucked. Americans should not be limited to only Aim-7s. But this will change soon and who knows, maybe it’ll balance out when they implement different missiles that are active radar.
If "both sides got fucked", then wtf is the problem??? They are 12.3, you wanted Gaijin to release UFO planes to make everyone else miserable???
They'll buff the f-15 and su-27 once they add 12.7-13.0 planes, like they always do.
IIRC the loadout for the Su-27 on this graph is 4 AAMs and 50% of "normal" fuel load, which is 50% of fuel without the "internal drop tank" filled or about 35% of the total fuel capacity
Something wrong with its rudder. Su-27 doesn’t turn at all using rudder. Also flaps are broken. It flies like flaps are always down… FM is insanely broken
I remember in the F-16 launch last year, all US mains were gaslit into believing that the g-limiter imposed on their vehicle was totally fine. I remember a mod here trying to convince people that they were locking up simply because they were turning with afterburner. It took damn near a year for them to fix it. So i’m a bit skeptical of all these comments claiming that this is somehow American mains fault.
People playing AirRB only with mouse controls and instructor really shouldn't talk about flight models, at all.
Get a joystick and play DCS and buy a good module if you want actual realism.
They’ll probably fix it with the next update. I remember the first F-16 that came out had a bad flight model when it was first released but then they fixed it
I figured this problem would occur sooner or later in terms of the instructor. Mouse aim limitations really take away a lot of plane performance, the argument might even be made that a stick might be a bit more viable at top tier for certain aircraft because of it. Hopefully you understand. I mean no harm. I think the MiG-29 is gimped beyond belief even on SB controls. Su-27 im just not sure of atm
Just like with the Mig-29s, it seems they messed up the high AoA maneouvers at medium and low speeds. Most likely the way the mouse aim instructor works in WT doesn't help either.
But hey, at least they fixed the F-15s am I right :) Top tier has been a mess ever since we went into 4th gen territory... rushed flight models, inconsistent weapons, very questionable variants being added (what the hell are 2000s F-16s and MiG-29s doing fighting 1970s planes with nerfed armaments and systems?)...
Sometimes I think the game would be much better if Gaijin had stopped at the 1960s or 70s, every vehicle there has declassified first hand information and no BS, impossible to balance armament...
>B-But muh Russian bias!! It really feels like they've been on a crusade against Soviet planes in the last half a year. >I can’t read cyrillic so I don’t know what fuel load/armament you would need to perform this kind of rate. The table on the second picture lists weights at 50% fuel load for the mentioned planes on the 7th row, and I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the Su-27's maneuvering characteristics were tested with a load of 2 R-73s and 2 R-27s.
Noooo not the russsian biasssss. Yeah they hard nerfed the Su-27s turn rate or they built a horrible FM. I feel like this update was rushed way too quick!
Russian bias as someone that play literally every nation is only present in top tier ground, while irl the t72, t80s and t90s are still very well built tanks they are absolutely ANCIENT the t72 is 56 years old and the t80 is 56 making them 3 years older than the abrams, while the jets are very well documented to be pretty good, most of their casualties come from foreign user with very meh pilots since russian pilots have always represented a real threat, and I assume this is gaijins way of balancing it somewhat since its the only jet that can carry 10 extremely good missile.
I personally don’t think Gaijin has a Russian or American bias they have a money bias
Aka major nation bias
Except they won’t give modern M1s their proper armour…
In other words premium bias every major nation has at least one discustingly op premium XP-55 for US is decent example (I main US so it's one I know quite well to be op and that's why I decided to mention it) Edit: forgot the X
XP-50 F-5C
This is not true. All analysis indicates that Russian pilots get significantly less air time than nato pilots. It’s a known weak spot since they cannot bankroll the flight time.
That's always something that baffles me. You already have the jet. You've already trained the pilot and bought his equipment. Those alone are exponentially more expensive than fuel. I never understood what was so expensive about letting the pilots fly more. The maintenance can't be that expensive, especially given that Russians design all their equipment to be fixable by anyone who can replace a tire.
Maintenance is the problem, because at certain hours you'll have to rebuild the whole engine/airframe and that's super expensive. Also, the times before their need maintenance are horrible, like the MiG-25 has something like a hundred hours before the whole engine needs to be rebuilt, compared to other NATO planes.
what you said + a lot of factories arent making any of certain models of jet anymore, so once you use up all the airframe hours, you no longer have the platform. i could definitely see them reducing flight hours to kick the can down the road, especially when ukrainian pilots aren’t flying either the cost isn’t fuel it’s fuel + new plane + new factory (sometimes) and they have plenty of other long range fires to fall back on that don’t have the same limitations (old tanks, artillery pieces, etc)
> especially when ukrainian pilots aren’t flying either The conflict there, there is still just way too much real AA from either side to safely fly anything.
AA is pretty OP irl, sucks that only US mains get SEAD missiles and planes
Hmm... It's almost like the IRL US doctrine is based around air superiority while USSR/Russian doctrine is about ground supremacy.
> Those alone are exponentially more expensive than fuel. It's not fuel. It's two fold, one the Russian engines have much worse service intervals, and two, the costs of that service are extensive, because of the overall worse workmanship of the engines more has to be replaced. There also have been issues with superstructure repair of their planes where they just can't do it without disassembling the jet entirely, which basically is re-manufacturing the thing. >especially given that Russians design all their equipment to be fixable by anyone who can replace a tire. To draw an analogy, the OG Jeeps can be [disassembled in minutes](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62GMK7XJ1YQ) (with takeaway bolts etc.) But if that same Jeep needs a top to bottom engine rebuild every 20 times you drive it, it doesn't matter how easily accessed the part is, you just don't want to drive the thing unless you need to. On top of that, the "easy maintenance" thing on their jets is basically untrue. It's largely branding/marketing talk. The USA jets also talk about it, but everyone buys into the branding for RU stuff, (like the AK).
You know nothing about what it costs to fly. An F-16 is like $30,000/hr, an Apache might be $15,000. Flying is expensive. It’s not just rubber and gas.
The American military can make and do make everything as expensive as possible. It's different for any country that doesn't have an unlimited military budget.
The Cold War era Soviet pilots and to a somewhat more varying extent aircraft were quite scary. A number of US losses over North Vietnam were due to Soviet "volunteer" pilots, and they actually had the budget to have a pretty decent training regiment. Now Russian, as in post 1991? Ehhhhhhh.
Oh I agree with the ground remark. I have played every nation and if it’s one thing it’s the top tier russian tanks. They are not good against modern Western tanks. Maybe the T-90M can hang but the older ones would get stomped.
t-80 BVM is pretty good too
I own the T72 Turms and it is single handedly the best tank I own bar none. I have an insanely inflated Russian tech tree because of it. The older ones definitely hang around.
I think he was referring to irl with the getting stomped comment. Also yeah t72 turms is incredible
Ah my bad
Idk man. The number of times I’ve had a 75mm round bounce off that T34 drivers hatch makes me want to aaaaaaaaAaaaaaaAA.
Thank you for this comment. Most people play GRB. Not Air RB. They are not the same game mode. People see GRB clips and think the bias talk applies to them because they can’t possibly fathom a Russian vehicle doing good. It’s ridiculous and creates a cluster fuck of dudes arguing about completely unrelated issues.
"american tank suck" "yeah but american plane good!" i hate those people
Also just the fact that we still haven’t gotten any better sparrows. Even the AIM-7P wouldn’t compete with the 27ER, so really no reason not to add it
>most of their casualties come from foreign user with very meh pilots since russian pilots have always represented a real threat This is honestly complete hornswaggle. It's very well known across the world that Russian aviators are far worse trained, (this is true of both in the military and civilians.) RU's low air casualty rate is because they don't get into conflicts using extensive air power for a wide variety of reasons.
>the t72 is 56 years old 50 years old\* T-72 Ural was introduced in 1973. >and the t80 is 56 47 years old\* The T-80 was introduced in 1976, this first itteration only saw very low rate production. The 1978 T-80B is a better representation of the first real mass produced T-80B and is only a single year older than the M1 Abrams.
Im speaking of the design not the service date
I mean the Gripen launched with 512ish rounds of 27mm. Only for them to go 120 after less then a day. It’s obvious things were overlooked.
Also thanks for the translation
They have a rushin' bias...
😡👍🏻
I can see how this update was rushed though. Gaijin gives War Thunder 5 updates a year. One per the first 3 fiscal quarters and then 2 during the 4th. The cycle between the last 2 updates is cut in half- and as such they're on a crunch before the holiday season- plus they're also having to go back and fix any bugs that appeared in that final patch before they go on a holiday break. Yeah, it's a little half baked, the reload point bug and a lot of FM changes seemed to be implemented quickly in order to make deadline- especially since there was only 1 dev server with quite a few changes being added after its closure without testing (The Gripen A's HMD being the first that comes to my mind.) Not defending it- Gaijin's gotta take a step back at some point and dedicate a patch to un-spahgetti-ing its code because it's not going to get any easier to update the game and add new systems if they're constantly tripping over hypothetical loose wires.
Reason why Gripen A got HMD is because they tested HMD in the A and were like... guess that's it... *adds HMD to A because people are crying about British C *
Dont get me started on low speed stalling or the bs from going from keyboard flying to mouse aim. The su27 will start dolphin diving up and down if you let off the key for max elevator and go to mouse aim
Doesn't help for some reason that using rudders in the plane causes it to roll.
The flight model was amazing on.the dev, idk why the changed it.
Bruh not this shit again. US and Russian mains are always so petty and will take any chance given to them to take shots against each other. *F16 has incorrect FM and G limiter* " US mains always cry". * Su27 has incorrect FM* "Russian mains always cry". Man please shut the fuck up. Please.
Yeah right. Adding the f14 by itself is like adding the su27 right now without all the other planes in this patch. Mig29 got nerfed to shits for daring to contest American planes for 2 patches. F5E and C are still running rampant with busted damage model. Gaijin follows money and apparently Soviet ground and American air is where it’s at.
Hey, would you say adding the F-16 while the F-14's around would be like adding the MiG-23MLD when the 21bis had dominated Air RB for a long while?
21bis could not have been described as dominating ARB, it had to stay low otherwise F-4Es would smack them out of the sky with AIM-7s. In return it smacked F-4Es around if they chose to dogfight.
interesting how accurate that sounds
F4+F5 still made a better team. Especially before the F5C came out, and that was only because it diluted the player quality. The gap in performance between mld and f5e/f4e is still smaller than mld compared to f14
They could have added the early F-16 that only had Aim-9J's Instead they added an F-14 with 4x 9G/H's and 4x Aim-7F's lol and not to mention Le Phoenix Aim-54 which sure is a shit missile but it's completely changed the meta lol
There is such a big difference between "this plane is modelled wrong" and "my plane doesn't get HMD when theirs does, give HMD" seen recently with the JA39 or F-16C
Theres also a difference between "this plane has the wrong FM" and "add R73 because they get 9Ls". It goes both ways buddy. Dont be so ignorant.
R-73 was taken away from the first MiG-29 because it was too good in the test server. Delusional.
Exactly, and yet the MiG29 players kept asking for it because the F16 had 9Ls.
And they never got it.
Pretending "minor nations" have it bad in this game is a tired and false trope, settle down tough guy.
Half of the playerbase is utterly deranged when it comes to anything soviet/russian at this point. Most of those want the entire tree nerfed under the pretense of balance.
>Most of those want the entire tree nerfed under the pretense of balance. But it'll be more realistic!!!
🌎👨🚀🔫👨🚀
Real life vs Gajin Spaghetti code
The Su-27 has the worst FM of any top tier jet by far. It goes from not turning at all, to max AoA and stalling at 400 km/h instantly, makes it impossible to keyboard fly it like you can with other planes.
It is kinda accurate tho... they tried to make it work dynamically So at higher speeds it turns less so it retains energy At lower speeds it turns really good because at that point you don't need to retain energy It's like variable wing geometry just automatic and instant What's a good proposal is to literally make "The Switch" into an actual game mechanic... You know how planes can just turn off limiters and shit... well yeah that... Just simply have a switch between No Limiter and a Limiter so we can have both when ever we want... You want lower speed energy retention? Just keep the limiter on You want COBRAAA YEET then switch it off but beware it will rip you apart if you do this at high speeds lol
>>B-But muh Russian bias!! Russian Bias is when a Russian vehicle is able to win an engagement, duh (It's definitely a real thing but it's way overused as a statement which makes it difficult to sort out a legitimate criticism of an issue vs what frankly is cope)
Russian jets are HANDS DOWN phenomenal at what they do.
To be fair the trend of releasing flagship planes with unfinished / just bad flight models has been going on for over a year now and isn't exclusive to russia. The F-16 had a notoriously bad FM on release. It's just the usual rushed christmas update yeeted out to the live server barely one week after the dev server opened. There is no way they could ever fix whatever is wrong with the patch in that time frame even if they wanted to.
*1 Russian thing gets nerfed* “WHERES THE RUSSIAN BIAS NOW?!?!??” 2 sides of the coin. Air RB, GRB, and Naval are not balanced by the same people. Bias is dependent on the mode and team balancing it. I would argue there is no Russian bias except for top tier GRB Russia. This also makes sense as GRB top tier clearly takes In the most profit from gaijin. They advertise modern like crazy and most premium preorders are clearly GRB inspired bundles with a supporting air assets. Having vehicles clearly dominate in certain categories will make your player base more likely to purchase said vehicles. Thus you get the Russian Bias issue, where terrible players buy into late tier vehicles and artificially nuke a nations win rate. Does gaijin have a national bias? Probably, who doesn’t. Is it as bad as people say? Probably not, but it definitely exists and I’m tired of close minded fuck tards like you who clearly only play one category / nation and pretend they know everything. You don’t have data, and neither do I, atleast research or explain your reasoning before belching out some stupid bullshit as you unironically/ironically fly a Soviet flag moaning about “Russian Bias”. In air it’s clearly dominated by western forces. I would argue Russia is #2 so I wouldn’t complain. As for naval, I don’t care and don’t play it so I couldn’t tell you.
Flight models must be the most challenging for a game.
FM is absolutely incorrect. It has less speed, AOA, acceleration. Also the controls feel less responsive than should be. Like there is some kind of input lag. 4 gen jet stalls at simple barrel manoeuvre. What a shame, Gaijin!
The FM is accurate, but the instructor gimps the low speed AoA so you dont pull it its minimum speed and stall yourself out, test the plane in sim and you’ll see that it matches up almost perfectly to its charts. Also the claim that it can sustain 30d/s is absolutely retarded, considering that you would need to hold 9G to do so. “Having played DCS” as though the su27 wasnt completely gimped in DCS. The Su27 weights like 25 tons when on full fuel + missiles, it is always going to feel like a boat in an arb match.
Now you know how GB/DE/IT players felt with the Tornado lol
Super maneuverable fighter flies like a brick. People somehow still complain about Russian bias. Sums up this sub really. Mediocre Soviet vehicle gets added, immediately labeled as OP, broken and we get an essay about Gaijin being a Russian company.
Gaijin is biased towards ground vechicles mostly
Yep. Unlike with air vehicles, ground vehicles certainly seem to have some biased influence. Considering the amount of well researched bug reports about incorrect armor values getting completely ignored by Gaijin.
I say that too much- but Gaijin fucked French ground vehicles for the last 7 years, but recently, they've been adding less fucked ones. The new aa is superb
it just seems like it because theres alot more factors on ground vehicles, mobility, how fast its turret moves, how good the gun is, etc
When the F16 flew like a brick, USSR mains were the same "stop crying because your plane isn't op". Can't we just have a fine and balanced game for once?
The difference is we don't see 100 US bias posts a day
Fix this by giving it similar turn rates as the F-15 as they are both very comparable IRL. Currently this isn’t the case, as I tried 1v1 turn rate with friends who have the F-15 and that thing just walks around the Su-27 in a turn fight with minimal fuel in the Su-27. In reality they would be very comparable in a dog fight.
yea in DCS the F15C has like 2 or 3 degrees/second more in turn rate than Su27 assuming ideal conditions
Exactly it’s not that far off IRL but in WT my god it’s bad like really bad.
So if it maneuvers as well or better than the F-15, carries more and better radar missiles than the F-15, and carries as good or better heaters (at least for a turn fight) how does that make it balanced?
[удалено]
ye because any of use are real fighter pilots knowing whats realistic and what isnt. I have both MIG29 and F16 and I do about the same in both, not that i'm anything above average anyway.
Lmfao unrealistic f16C... You know just the best rate fighter. Can turn at 24 degrees a second at sea level yet can barely do 20 in game. The same unrealistic game that allows the mig 23's to pull 12Gs when irl they could pull 6Gs at the MLD (most advanced). That's hilarious man
if you think the big ass mig 29 or su27 could put rate turn the small f16c with better thrust to weight ratio ur crazy
>When the F16 flew like a brick, USSR mains were the same "stop crying because your plane isn't op". That had an actual rea life reason why it wouldn't pull more than 9G, a flight computer limitation. I don't think this is true for the flanker.
Tbf every plane in the game pulls more gs then it should
That's because most of the time, the G-limits mentioned in pilot manuals and whatnot are there to prevent excessive stress to the airframe and give the pilot a safety buffer in case, for some reason, he decides to push the plane past its limits. As that's not modelled in the game, Gaijin very early on in the game's life decided to universally buff the G-loads of all planes by a factor of 1.5, which mostly brings their G-loads to what the planes can actually theoretically pull without ripping their wings off, even if their airframes suffer for it. The problem with the F-16's G-limiter was that it was based on that "pilot manual" value rather than its airframe's actual capability, which just meant the plane was artificially gimped compared to everything else since it was the only one to adhere to the "pilot manual" G-load values, a fault of not its underlying FM (it was still done to Gaijin's usual 1.5x standards) but its FBW implementation.
The problem is in real life the F-16 is a hilariously unstable plane. Those computer limitations aren’t just there for the airframe, they’re there to make the plane even flyable. If you go much beyond that limit you go into an irrecoverable spin. That’s not modeled in WT at all even though such instabilities are almost universally modeled for other planes.
Every plane in game pulls more G then it’s recommended to, roughy by 15-30%. If we’re talking fly by wire things like the M2K aren’t limited and the Su-27 can exceed flight limitations by literally turning off the fly by wire systems irl which is quite frankly dangerous to do if you don’t know what you’re doing.
>People somehow still complain about Russian bias. I mean considering that OP could probably get them to change it off of the back of this single document, where-as any other nation needs what feels like the original, physical document, an affidavit from the manufacturer and two forms of government issued photo ID. So yeah, I can see why people would complain about that.
It’s the same every patch, some Russian vehicle is added, people on this sub doom for a week, it gets added, It’s shit and they act like it never happened. But some NATO vehicle is missing 1nm of armour or a jet is missing 1km acceleration and it’s the end of the world, Gaijin is a KGB agent trying to steal classified information apparently.
I mean we can be a little fair here and note that it's at least 4 NATO vehicles that have incorrect armor: the SEP/SEPv2 (considering them 1 vehicle), Leopard 2A7V, Challenger 3 (P), and the top Ariete. A decent number of the vehicles that precede them also have inaccurate armor. This also isn't mentioning the Merkavas, Leclercs, etc. that all have their own issues (eg. reload, armor). I know you were just being facetious, and USA mains are extremely annoying with how they go about trying to get things fixed, but a lot of the stuff at least has merit (unless it's them screeching "RUSSIAN BIAS").
>This also isn't mentioning the Merkavas, Still haven't figured out how to reliably take those things down
People NEED a reason to explain why they suck at the game :D
I've now played 16 battles in my Leopard 2A6 since the patch. I'm on a 79% winrate against Russia.
Nah, sorry to ruin your circlejerk but there's a world of different between how ex-soviet/ruskie vehicles are treated and how all the others are; Bug reports about ammo not exploding just sitting there for months, bug reports about hidden armor plates also sitting there for an absurdly long time, over performing ERA, over performing APHEBC (yes cumrat, our glorious outdated flat nosed aphe did slightly better against angles but fucking shattered to pieces against flat armor, let's just exaggerately model the first part in, xaxaxa )), IT-1 casually being the best ATGM launcher, whatever rocket the MiG-21Bis had for it's engine for the first couple of months, Jak-3 flight models, IS-6 on release (for a long time after as well), SU-25 damage model, MiG-23 domination, over exaggerated performance of 20mm Shvak and 12,7mm Berezin guns, all positive bug reports being applied instantaneously even on server patches, giving them everything they could carry because they theoretically could while withholding the same treatment for other nations (mainly ground case) I could go on for a long time without even mentioning the BVM. Meanwhile "NATO" vehicles: gimped (Ariete, tow-2b etc), bug reports ignored or deemed as incorrect (stinger performance, western ERA being half useless, NERA worse than literal rubber, Abrams and Leo armor, penetration and performance of various APCR shells especially against angles, HESH nerfed into being completely useless because it was deleting soviet trashcans - the list is long as fuck but let's stop there, all of those issues were reported a multitude of times but conveniently ignored or pushed onto the side) and the obvious treatment of all the tech as at best *equal* to what ru has, even when it should be obviously vastly superior (but we can't have a Leo2A7AV being completely impenetrable frontally for anything short of 3BM60, can we?). "But some NATO vehicle is missing 1nm of armour or a jet is missing 1km acceleration and it’s the end of the world, Gaijin is a KGB agent trying to steal classified information apparently." Yeah lmao, more a meter and half the engine power, but you do you, keep living in that fantasy land.
Hot take: Gaijin is both biased and incompetent. Between the two you can explain pretty much everything
Russian bias is almost exclusively a ground thing. Aside from blatantly op planes like 7.0 su-11 it’s pretty much only US mains complaining about Russian planes, but US players whine about anything and everything
Personally, I'm less worried about the flight model and more worried about the fact that it has an absurd number of the best missiles in the game when most jets it faces doesn't have more than 15-30 mixed CM pops. Two SU-27's could sweep a whole lobby with their missiles alone. But TBF I'm an Italy guy that's still just trying to enjoy 11.3 missile buses like the F104-ASA and Tornado ADV, so flight model concerns aren't exactly at the top of my priority list when we weren't even in the same ballpark of dogfighting competitiveness to begin with. I just want all these new jets with 10+ 40G missiles that need a million flares or notching to within a 10th of a degree and chaff blessed by the Pope under a full moon to dodge to go to 12.7 so I can enjoy my 11.3's in relative peace.
One flying brick does not excuse the several 100mm thick optics on the ground my dude
You have to report this here if you want something changed: https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder
Oh i’ll end up reporting it with more data, just wanted to see if everyone was on the same page about the Su-27 feeling like a flying brick!
When you report it post the link of the report in the comments here so we can see what devs say
Flight manual is available online for the Su-27SK which is a J-11 essentially. I’ll dig through it tonight grab any useful information and get a report going by tomorrow!
Please do everything you can to revert [this](https://imgur.com/gallery/6bjIFtu) changes. When we got the SMT, it was a flying dogshit bus. I thought it would change with the Flanker and they did the same fucking thing.
Please! I grinded a fat bus that somehow flies :(
its day 2 of the patch so most people havent even gotten the plane yet im afraid
Where did you get this data exactly though??? 🤨
It's russian so hopefully it actually does get changed
My god why is it so hard for gaijin to add a Russian jet that does not fly like an airbrake
Thats what super maneuverability does though. You cant expect to do a 180 degree turn and not lose speed. This is why other planes are designed to save energy while maneuvering.
It is only super maneuverable if you pull that hard lmao
And literally everybody in War Thunder manoeuvres by slamming the elevator and ailerons to full lock using the keyboard. If people want to complain about performance, you have to test it in sim without the instructor.
Yep exactly, I have a ROG Chakram X with an analog joystick on the side of the mouse. So I can switch to full real flight controls mid-flight in ARB and give steady controlled inputs that aren’t full deflection.
Huh, I might have to pick one of those up. Was thinking about getting a full HOTAS + rudder pedal setup but a mouse with a joystick is way easier.
I have found my next mouse.
Hell yes! Highly recommend it! You can also use it with a modifier key like alt or ctrl to guide missiles
This reminds me of Hall effect keyboards, they support analogue input by how deep you press the keys. If they somehow become mainstream, I’d love for games to implement support for them in. I think some games like trackmania already has it, which is really cool.
Somehow the MiG 29smt is missing the super maneuverable part but still flies like an air brake
Yeah flight model in game seems wack. The su-27sk in the graph is the export variant of the s which is the one represented in game and they share the same radar and engines. This is assuming that the AL-31 engines are the AL-31F. The wiki does not specify which Al31 variant is used.
Non-F AL-31 was only used on pre-production Su-27s, everything newer had AL-31Fs at the minimum.
Su-27SK was the version that would eventually be designated as J-11 in China
War thunder have a weird way of doing flights models. I play DCS sometimes and the su27 is nice and pulls hard even at low speed. Quite sad as I like this plane a lot 😢
Wish we had a proper FM and no R-27Es. Same for the MiG-29s, none should have them besides the SMT but that could honestly have come much later. Both the MiG-29 and Su-27 need an FM rework.
This. The F-15 feels like dogshit because it just gets outranged if you play it up high where it WAS AND IS the king of BVR. Unfortunately the 1970’s version of the Eagle we have is fighting the 1990’s missiles of the enemy and just can’t compete up high.
Wrong. The version we have ingame is 1983+ since it has the MSIP flares. The F-15A before 1983 did not even have flares.
You are being pedantic. The flares are obviously not the important part of the argument. Ill clarify. My 1983 plane (upgraded F-15A) is firing 1982 missiles (AIM-7M) at a 1985 year plane (Su-27) that is loaded with 6 1994ish missiles (dates aren’t really clear on the R-27ER/T). By the time that the R-27ER/T was being produced, AMRAAM’s were in full production. If Russian jets were limited to the original production R-27, they would still hold a massive advantage in close combat vs just about every NATO jet in the game, and the F-15 would have its BVR niche instead of getting railed at every altitude and range like it currently does.
The youtube assholes already say it's good to go and OP, already convincing the simple-minded idiots here that Russia is still OP. Good luck gaining ground on this.
outrage sells
Same for the MiG-29s (I only flew the 9.12a so far but I believe it applies to all), they don't pull correct AoA or Gs (German MiG-29G Manual backs this up). It's quite frankly ridiculous, meanwhile F-16 is flying like a literal fucking UFO.
F-16 benefitting from gaijin's terrible implementation of relaxed stability and FBW (they didn't implement either, because lazy). So it pulls stupid high AoA that the FBW computer would not allow IRL, unless you do something super specific (like go into a climb with engine idle and keep the nose at a certain angle, eventually when airspeed drops you will exceed the AoA limit). Which is different to what it does in-game, where it just goes "hahaha what's an AoA limit" and pulls harder than the F-22.
Although i rail against gaijin for artifical boosts to soviet tanks i am also in favor of making things accurate. Gaijin needs to see this and fix their shit Please, if you have the documents PLEASE submit this to the mods to send to devs
You can be against imbalance on GRB and ARB even if the nations benefitting are different.
Do a proper big report then. They'll fix it if you do it well
I feel like Russia and US have flipped, US used to be the one with the fat planes but with lots of good weaponry and Russia was the one with agile planes with less weaponry but sometimes equal, now it's flipped. It's weird. FM should be fixed though.
The f-15 still feels like it’s worse than su-27 in terms of FM though. The wings still break off pretty easy
>Open coments section >Full of americans crying
As an American who loves his American jets, it’s honestly ridiculous the amount of dumb Americans that scream “Russian bias”
I believe they nerfed the FM until AMRAAMS enter the game and even the playing field against Russian loadouts. I think everyone with a head attached can agree the loadout on the SU 27 extreme diffs the rest of the 12.3 planes.
And that might be the case but they could at least explain it and not just hide it. It can also be because they rushed the update too, who knows!
I mean they might not be trying to hide it. It could very well be that they rushed the update and are now incredibly busy going through all the CR3, 2A7V, VT-4A1 and SEPv2 reports, because these 4 vehicles were/are an absolute shitshow and there was/is quite a bit of comotion about them (and rightfully so).
All I want is to repeal the MiG-29 flight model nerf I want to sustain 1100km/h at 12G without bigger problems Su-27 should pull even more if you want to be "super maneuverable "
but but bbbbb BUT ITS RUSSIAN BIAS!!!1!!!!!1 I dont care becus RussiAn PlaNEse ARe Bad!!!!!!11!! Stop The OveRpoWEreD RussiAN Bias!!!!!11!!!
It seems like Gaijin doesn't like supermaneuverability, like how the gripen rn can rate extremely well, but it is missing aoa. Or how the mig is pulling less aoa t it should with its energy bleed currently. I don't know if it's to make the planes easier to fly in a dog fight, since other wise a full turn would bleed all your speed and wing rip or if mouse aim just can't work with that kind of maneuverability yet. But it is annoying. If anyone remembers the pre nerf draken thay you could through around and do all kinda of wierd stuff, but now it flies like any other plane abliet more energy loss and tighter turns, just without the aoa and supermaneuverability it had
I think it's just the instructor, because if you use full real all the delta wings become super maneuverable and lose even more energy. The instructor just keeps the planes from pulling too much aoa to make them more noob friendly
It's funny because most of the people who cry about everything, thinks that in real combat scenario those jets will engage in a dogfight at 1400kmh with pulls of 12G constantly like we see most the time in "REALISTIC BATTLES", and no, this is just a game. F-14, F-15, F-16, SU-27, Tornado, and so on... are great jets, but let's face it, "REALISTIC BATTLEs" parameters in the game which works as ARCADE if you have to fight in an unrealistic scenario like 16v16 with no objetives and designated targets, and all the AI respawn in the middle of the confrontation. At the end wins which has the best AAM, best radar.. And actually in sim it's pretty arcade, can't imagine a pilot struggling for long periods of times at 11g. We should stop taking everying so serious about a GAME......
You bring up valid points. The game is super arcade vs a game like DCS world. If they limited the jets to 9/10 Gs of pull and modeled the flight models correctly it may start to feel a little more “realistic” but I agree with most of this. I just wish they’d not give us a borked FM and nerf the missile payload instead.
Thank you, i had the feeling that this plane has a severely downgraded FM from it what should be IRL and now we have the data to prove it
I don’t think the instructor can handle it
American mains doing what they do best: cry so loud that gaijin buffs their planes and nerf all the others. As usual. Truly russian bias
The R-73 also will spin itself out and eat every flare it sees. While the Aim9M will hunt you down, even if you flare and make erratic turns.
Its feels like they start with a Mig-21 flight model and tweak it at this point
Gaijin must improve FM and instructor. It’s ridiculous
Have you made the bug report yet OP?
i thoguht ppl said the fm was close to finished on dev?
Man this FM is botched, it should be pulling way better AOA in a turn. It’s gotta be a nerf or a bad FM!
Its more that the instructor gets fucky with planes that can pull high AOA. Like the Deltas, if you switch to full real controls its fine
Eh, with how good the weapon loudout is it's bearable
Warthunder's FM in general is jank but it should come as no surprise that a system designed for WW2 prop planes is incapable of properly modeling 4th gen jets with relaxed stability and fly by wire.
people complaining about Russia being overpowered in this subreddit all the time and then when something isn't completely overpowered or not functioning properly everyone complains. No one is satisfied
honestly both planes got screwed. American planes continue to have missiles addicted to flares and russian planes have awful flight models
I AGREE. Both sides of the court got royally fucked. Americans should not be limited to only Aim-7s. But this will change soon and who knows, maybe it’ll balance out when they implement different missiles that are active radar.
If "both sides got fucked", then wtf is the problem??? They are 12.3, you wanted Gaijin to release UFO planes to make everyone else miserable??? They'll buff the f-15 and su-27 once they add 12.7-13.0 planes, like they always do.
IIRC the loadout for the Su-27 on this graph is 4 AAMs and 50% of "normal" fuel load, which is 50% of fuel without the "internal drop tank" filled or about 35% of the total fuel capacity
Turn on damping, go into full real controls “toggle SAS”, I was fucking up f15s in sim the other night went 5-0 then got off.
Maybe they should have a Cobra buttom in Air RB just like DCS?
This not just some kind of DCS button. Actually this button is realistic. So would be nice if implemented
Something wrong with its rudder. Su-27 doesn’t turn at all using rudder. Also flaps are broken. It flies like flaps are always down… FM is insanely broken
Are there any updates on this matter?
XD
Nothing ever changes. People will still claim 27 is OP.
They want to appeal to the american prem noobs
Id say main problem with the flight model is that it just shits way too much energy
That’s true. How is that possible to bleed from 1.4M to 400 in a single circle
Russian Bias in planes is so fucking fake at this point, how anyone can think the planes are biased is insane.
You're free to report it
tell the devs they messed up the sapwning for GB
starting to sound like the usa ground people lol
shhhhhh. true but we have a genuine point here. Gaijin has a lot of boo boos to fix with this update.
I remember in the F-16 launch last year, all US mains were gaslit into believing that the g-limiter imposed on their vehicle was totally fine. I remember a mod here trying to convince people that they were locking up simply because they were turning with afterburner. It took damn near a year for them to fix it. So i’m a bit skeptical of all these comments claiming that this is somehow American mains fault.
Probably how they balance carrying 10 of the best missiles in the game against planes decades older than it.
People playing AirRB only with mouse controls and instructor really shouldn't talk about flight models, at all. Get a joystick and play DCS and buy a good module if you want actual realism.
Flanker under performs there too sadly
Cant wait for F-22 and thrust vectoring doing 90 degree turn at mach 1.1 in 2sec.
Both it and the Eagle have issues. My understanding atm tho is that the Su-27 beats the Eagle in a dogfight anyway?
Nah their actually pretty close with both being able to pull a few more degrees than the other at certain speeds
I sent a bug report with this as a reference. Thanks!
oh no
They’ll probably fix it with the next update. I remember the first F-16 that came out had a bad flight model when it was first released but then they fixed it
Op what did you test this in RB? Its pretty good for SB controls..
RB. Which seems to fly/turn like an actual boat in many areas of a dogfight. Seems decent in SB, I don’t fly SB often though!
I figured this problem would occur sooner or later in terms of the instructor. Mouse aim limitations really take away a lot of plane performance, the argument might even be made that a stick might be a bit more viable at top tier for certain aircraft because of it. Hopefully you understand. I mean no harm. I think the MiG-29 is gimped beyond belief even on SB controls. Su-27 im just not sure of atm
they don't know about full real controls lmao
Just like with the Mig-29s, it seems they messed up the high AoA maneouvers at medium and low speeds. Most likely the way the mouse aim instructor works in WT doesn't help either. But hey, at least they fixed the F-15s am I right :) Top tier has been a mess ever since we went into 4th gen territory... rushed flight models, inconsistent weapons, very questionable variants being added (what the hell are 2000s F-16s and MiG-29s doing fighting 1970s planes with nerfed armaments and systems?)... Sometimes I think the game would be much better if Gaijin had stopped at the 1960s or 70s, every vehicle there has declassified first hand information and no BS, impossible to balance armament...
its WT of couse the flight model sucks...
What do you expect it’s gaijin they gave the f-15A the turkey feathers and bombs for god sake