posted 08-09- 01:17 PM
Opinions of a squaddie, not me:After spending hours working with this sim, I have made some conclusions.
#1 -- This is a good sim for learning about the SU-27/33. It has a good FM,
good avionics, (which you have to figure out mostly for yourself), and some
nice effects. Weather, time of day, fog, clouds, they're nicely done. Free
flight is exciting. I feel I have had a good introduction to a fighter jet
I knew very little about, before buying this sim.
However,
#2 -- Beyond the training missions, there is really no point in spending
any more time with this sim. The individiual missions seem pointless, and
obtuse. With an almost arrogant style, the SSI mission authors have given
us the utmost in trivial tasks, littered with gobbledegook briefings. I
mean, who writes this stuff? The Flanker 2.0 creators really ought to fire
their creative writing staff.
Examples:
A/A Mission folder, 1v1 against an F15. You are tasked to "do some
piloting stuff".
A/A Mission folder, 1v1 against some other bandit, it is said your
greatest danger is your own ineptness, or something along those lines.
A/A Mission folder, you are tasked to down an F16, and, "Make the pilot
die for his country."
#3 -- The SSI mission creators vision of creating a challenging mission is
to cause parts of your airplane to fail, (for no reason), and then expect
you to continue enroute and finish your task. Perhaps things are truly
dismal in Russia, and their warplanes really are falling apart. From the
Flanker 2.0 missions, I get the distinct impression that the SU-27 is a
piece of crap, and that all Nato / Allied planes need to do is wait long
enough, and the advanced Russian fighters will simply fall from the sky.
I'm sorry, SSI, but if it's realism you're after, no pilot in their right
mind would attempt to sweep, intercept, or CAP without a functioning radar,
(yet most of the canned missions do exactly this). To help make missions
boring, SSI has decided not to let you customize your weapon loadout. This
is so you do exactly as they say, and fly from point A to B, without
considering any alternative strategies to finishing a mission. For example,
you cannot load
a couple of anti-ship, or anti-radar missiles along with your A/A
complement. You must choose one or the other, but not both.
#4 -- The SSI mission creators programmed in the use of AWACS target
handoff, yet this is almost entirely absent from the canned missions. Most
of the missions have you off an a sweep / intercept, but with no AWACS, or
ground crew contact? Some of the mission briefings specifically state,
"Remain in constant contact with your ground crew", but this is completely
unimplemented in the game. In fact, in only 1 of 10 missions I have flown,
has there been any AWACS in the sky. But even in that mission it didn't
matter, since ~20 seconds after you start the mission, your radar / MFD is
programmed to fail.
#5 -- Mission de-briefings. How about a sortie rating? Something to let me
know I did a good job, or failed, or made some kind of impact. The
briefings are little more than statistics, and give one no sense of
accomplishment. In fact, most of the time, one would never know if the
missions was a success, or not. Even better, how about a little "radio
contact" with your CO, who can verify if/when you have completed the
mission objectives. Something a la GSC's FA/18 Hornet, where you can call
the mission commander, who gives you a "nothing to report", or a "mission
complete", or a "mission not successful" report.
#6 -- The "campaign" is little more than a continued series of pointless
missions. Since everything is static, there is no continuity between
missions, and no sense of accomplishment. You are tasked to do seemingly
pointless things, (like escort a bomber group 100 km's to a new base). Why
would long-range bombers need to fly 100 km somewhere? Even more ludicrous,
is the seemingly large numbers of friendly / unfriendly planes in the sky,
but there's no AWACS, or ground control, to coordinate things.
#7 -- The landings. If you've tried this sim, you know what I'm about to
say, so I'll be brief. Doesn't matter whether it's on pavement, or a
carrier, it's almost impossible to crash if your gear is down. Ironic,
because no matter how soft you try to land on the grass beside the runway,
you always blow up. Guess they never heard of belly landings in emergencies.
#8 -- Countermeasures are ineffective.
#9 -- EOS / IR targetting behaves identical to doppler radar targetting.
Enemy planes receive a spike from a missile launch, regardless of the
method of delivery. IR guided missiles miss if you break EOS lock, (as
would a SARH missile miss if you break radar lock).
#10 -- Encyclopedia. This is about as useful as a primary-grade picture
book, colored by primary graders with crayons. SSI could really learn a
thing or two from Falcon 4's technical reference, or WWII Fighters history
museum. How about some real pictures, with some useful information.
#11 -- Missile / SAM performance. I swear I saw one SAM do the hokey pokey
and turn itself around. SAMs and missiles also have that super-special
x-ray vision, that allows them to see through hills, and buildings. They
must also be using Energizer batteries, because they keep going, and going,
and going. In fact, they keep going 2-3 times as far and high as they're
rated to go.
#12 -- AI has a 3-5 minute attention span. I call it the Alzheimer AI
phenomenon. After this time, they forget what it was they were doing, and
fly straight and level, ignoring the fact just a half minute earlier, they
were trying to kill you.
#13 -- Autopilot is truly messed up. Engaging autopilot works well.
Disengaging is another story.
#14 -- I'm truly amazed at the number of airfields in the combat area. Too
bad none of them has a tower, (or anyone in the tower), or any ground
crews, or any planes taxiing around the ground.
#15 -- The manual.... a dismal failure. It does not explain, (not even a
little bit) about the nuances of the various radar / EOS modes. You're left
to discover this yourself, in broken, {insert cyrillic chars} {insert
pronunciation}run-on, endless, {insert cyrillic} {insert pronunciation}
{insert english translation} {insert english symbol}
pronounciation-focussed, Cyrillic-filled, (get the point) sentences. The
writers seem more concerned that you learn to pronounce their words
properly, than derive any meaning from what they're writing.
I could go on, and on, and on about the serious shortcomings of this sim.
My advice is not to buy it at this time, if you're interested in a "game"
beyond simply learning how to fly and use the avionics of the SU-27/33.
Perhaps after the next patch, this game will be worth playing.
Let me sum this up by (almost) quoting a passage from the manual, Page 1,
2nd paragraph.
"Born in the dying days of the cold war, the Flanker (2.0) did not have an
easy life and the inital design suffered from serious problems. The breakup
of the Soviet Union and subsequent collapse of the Russian economy hindered
its development, in many ways denying the Flanker (2.0) an opportunity to
prove itself as the world's greatest tactical aircraft (sim)."
Scoob
FSIC Messageboard
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
posted 08-07- 05:38 PM
posted 08-08- 10:54 PM
