NATO Bias

[Avgeek2010]

I personally fly Soviet/Russian Planes the most, and honestly, it can be unplayable at times. Not everyone plays NATO, and Red missiles are SO underpowered. Even the weapon modders underpower Red Weapons while buffing US Missiles. I went to edit the weapons to make it fair and saw US missiles at Practically max stats. Like, what do you mean an AIM-120C-3 can pull 50Gs?!

[Flanker562]

As I'm sure Gepard commented on the other topic about this, most Russian AAMs and such weren't as good as they claimed. The G ratiing on an AMRAAM is even sus as nobody knows the actual figures, due to the classified nature of the missile, so in essence you're right, but also wrong too.

[Muesli]

1 hour ago, Avgeek2010 said:

I personally fly Soviet/Russian Planes the most, and honestly, it can be unplayable at times. Not everyone plays NATO, and Red missiles are SO underpowered. Even the weapon modders underpower Red Weapons while buffing US Missiles. I went to edit the weapons to make it fair and saw US missiles at Practically max stats. Like, what do you mean an AIM-120C-3 can pull 50Gs?!

Feel free to mod YOUR install anyway you like... If you don't like the work of other creators you are free to leave. Don't let the door hit you on the way out and we don't need an announcement; we're not at the airport...

Buhbye...

[ravenclaw_007]

1 hour ago, Avgeek2010 said:

I personally fly Soviet/Russian Planes the most, and honestly, it can be unplayable at times. Not everyone plays NATO, and Red missiles are SO underpowered. Even the weapon modders underpower Red Weapons while buffing US Missiles. I went to edit the weapons to make it fair and saw US missiles at Practically max stats. Like, what do you mean an AIM-120C-3 can pull 50Gs?!

you know checkin the internet some times helps , this is what the net says about the max g-load for the AIM-120C , it is not 50 Gs but 40 Gs by the way modern A-A missiles can reach up to 60 Gs and more like the IRIS-T

• Max G-Load: The AIM-120C is widely reported to pull up to 40 Gs.
• Performance Context: While 40G is the structural/system limit, the missile achieves maximum maneuverability at high speeds (approaching Mach 4).
• Comparison: Earlier models like the AIM-120A/B are typically rated around 35 Gs, while the C-series improved upon this, even with "clipped" wings for internal storage

[Wrench]

the gods forbid that folks ACTUALLY do any independent research

[daddyairplanes]

while the game is in fact biased to the western stuff working better, you need to consider something

since the 1970s, the Soviets/Russians would release a weapon, and make claims on it. western intelligence would then analyze and make judgements based on western thinking.

so we ( the US particularly) make weapons to beat what we THINK the Soviet/Russian systems can do

when the weapons meet on a battlefield (or even just get seen like the MiG-25 in Japan 1976), the Soviet/Russian systems tend to fall way way short of brochure.

meanwhile, the Russians release something new they claim will beat the current US system

lather. rinse. repeat.

[MigBuster]

A lot of the weapon systems are pie in the sky and combat is the only place where they get properly tested. Imagine how revered the AIM-4D would be if it never saw combat. Revered today on the www as the missile the USAF should have used to solve all its problems no doubt

 

[warthog64]

I'm sure weapons developed by the former Soviet Bloc are formidable. Not as formidable as western Nato tech though (IMO). Eastern and western weapons have never really been tested to their full potential against each other with a peer adversary, just export versions against a superpower's weapons or other export weapons. Nuclear weapons have and will keep the peace. I'm just a novice so don't quote me.

Edited Saturday at 06:42 PM by warthog64

[MAF1247]

I actually made a post a week ago talking about this nato bias (

 

I know that from a gameplay pov it's incredibly frustrating, but it has a base of reality nonetheless. WIth minor exceptions, NATO tech from the 1970s on ward took such a long jump ahead that Soviets/Russian were never able to catch up, with some exceptions due to reverse engineer some dud  western missiles in proxy wars captured by Soviet's allies. In reality we can see that with the war in Ukraine were the Russian Air Force struggles with UAF due to their tech disparity in A/A missiles, or in the past during both Gulf Wars, were Iraqi migs were always in disadvantage compared to NATO fighters. 

I recently played Black Sea Crisis campaign mod with the red side (piloting a Su-27M) and ngl, it was incredibly frustrating. I had to repeat some missions even 10 times (with difficulty set on EASY) to accomplish something and go back to the base, only to end the war in a stalemate. And every sortie was close to a massacre, because almost my wingmen got shot down leaving me or only with my second wingman alive. After 5 missions i already reached the minimum number of pilots available in squadron, with the risk of failing the campaign due to lack of men available.

When you play "Red" you have to completely change tactics: fly VERY close to the ground to avoid SAMs (NATO SAMs are 5 times more lethal than Soviets), fly zig-zagging, using your faster engines and manuverability to avoid long range missles, deploy a lot of chaff and when close to the enemy aircraft, go vertical full power, lunch missiles, get the target, go down and repeat until the majority of your target is destroyed and mission is accomplished. Then GTFO back to base at full AB. Don't be greedy, because most Nato missiles are not track from RWR so there are big chances that you get hit by a missiles you didn't know was launched.

Problem is that the game engine is not build to balance red side campaign, because the vanilla game never allowed you to play with Red aircrafts or play red campaign, so everyhting is unbalanced to the core. Soviets campaigns are fun in the timeframe of 1950s-1960s, in which the tech was still on the same level between the two sides. If you play Korea War from NK perspective, it's actually very enjoyable and both Mig-15 and Mig-17 are beasts compared to Sabres. Also early Mig-21 in Vietnam is ok, but start to become challenging. Every Red campaign from the 1970s onward becomes pure frustration.