MiG-24

The computers also kick the snot out of the Mig-23MLD.

Of course - I have also done similar with the F-15C - 12 F-15Cs - most configurations with 6 AMRAAMs and 2 Sidewinders vs 8 F-16Cs, and 'half a million' (20) F-5Es.

I've had as many as 8 F-15Cs survive (not including myself, as I 'led' the charge and ate about five AMRAAMs and three Aim-9s by time my miraculously intact fuselage hit the ground) the conflict.

Also - the performance values of the US aircraft are all based on factory-given specifications that are not concurrent with real-life performance.

Take the A-10, for example, and try to get that plane to bank like they do up here at the airshow, all the time. It doesn't happen - even when stripped down to 'no' weapons. It's fairly accurate.

However, the most accurate flight simulator I have ever flown has got to be Flightgear. It's a free, open-source simulator that uses a variety of different model formats (which does affect accuracy) to accomplish its accuracy.

It also runs at like 2 frames per second on my computer... which is odd since my computer beats the hell out of the requirements (and I have the openGL libraries on my computer...).... Although it 'behaves' when I use maps from the original installation and not the downloaded terrain packs.

That being said - it's pretty dashgum realistic. It even 'pulls' the aircraft when you pass in close proximity to a ridge - due to the turbulance. Once I figured out how to use the joystick properly with the game, I was exstatic about flying the YF-23 around in the mountains at supersonic speeds (not sure if supersonic flight is simulated accurately in the engine or not.... not sure if ANY flightsim can perform those in real-time). All-in-all - assuming the values for the YF-23 are correct - or about... it's by-far the most maneuverable thing there is. It can pull an inverted loop at 600 knots in about the time it takes the F-15 to do a quarter of a loop. Roll rate is a little slow (probably because rolling would also affect the yaw, which would be counter-acted by other control surfaces with fly-by-wire and I don't think those can be simulated very well with the program given) - but pitch is absolutely nuts.

That, and the drag on the design (again, assuming the Flight Dynamics Model is accurate and the simulator has it all right) is almost not there. It took me forever to go from 600 knots to a realistic approach speed - and even then, it just kept wanting to keep flying, rather than land. I ended up literally gliding for more than a few miles at about 500 feet - and then God-knows how many more trying to set the dang thing down.

Not sure if the lift values on it are correct... it just seems like it wants to fly WAAAAY too much (whoever thought that'd be bad for a plane). But, there again, no one knows - as the real aircraft have not had their true specifications released to the public.

I haven't tried that sim, old joystick broke down and I currently invest all my cash in the damn car, but as I said, Flight sims are made by humans, and humans tend to dial their preferences into a game. Probably that's the case with your YF-23 that wants to 'fly too much', as there is no way the guys who made the game to know the data of the YF23's characteristics.
What I've seen with my eyes in the real world is that a MiG-23 ML repeatedly beat a MiG-29 in staged dogfights (which is not to say 23 is better than 29, it's just close enough for a good pilot to even the odds). And I've seen the MiG-29 against 2 F-4s. The whole thing looked more like a target practice for the 29 than a contest.
Please note I wasn't saying that 23 is a match for F-15 BVR, only that it can hold it's own against it in a dogfight. But it has better BVR than F-4 (F-16A doesn't have BVR at all), incomparably better WVR than F-4 and matches the F-16A (only true for MLD, has better vertical and acceleration, F-16 turns better).
So, I can not accept anyone calling the MiG-23 mediocre or a saturation fighter.
I still claim that it was the most advanced fighter when it was introduced, although initially flawed due to lack of proper testing. the only real problem it had was that it needed a very good pilot to get the max out of it. Such pilots were a dime a dozen during the good times of the Warsaw pact, but after that, these machines proved difficult for pilots with 20 flight hours per year and most of them were withdrown from service which is sad.

this is mig-23......or min-23's version....