And as many times that I’ve fought against it and in it I can confidently say that it’s " OPness " is more overplayed than it is not, as most of the gripes about it is based on the DM that can at times be inconsistent and the issue about the heat signature.
You solve those? It’s still a middlin’ aircraft. It’s barely supersonic and the colt 20mms are quite awful with middlin’ velocity and inconsistent damage. It also has no radar. It shares the BR range with aircraft that are faster, have better missiles including BvR AAMs with the radar to use them. The countermeasures the F-5C has are the saving grace for it as without them it’d be fodder to jets in it’s own BR range - and completely DoA in uptiers - Not that it doesn’t skirt that line already. And as mentioned before, it’s a problem in a downtier because of the compression issue - And it’s far from the only bully in those downtiers.
I’m in agreement that the DM needs correcting and that the heat signature issue needs correcting, but other than those things all I see is a middlin’ aircraft that simply isn’t worth the MSRP.
Looking at the wording in the function box, it seems that IFF is so the F-5 can identify itself to other radars, not so it can interrogate radar targets
Nerf bat the F-5E from literally being able to turn 180 degrees and keep all energy. Move F-4E from 11.3 to 11.0.
Let F-4C carry flares even if they ‘realistically’ never carried them. The reasons are so razor thin even though they realistically could and it would detract nothing of realism from them, unlike the F-5E being a mishmash of 5 different variants
A monopulse aircraft that faces PD aircraft with all-aspect capable missiles that surpass it in almost every way? Give it CAA and the simulated doppler inputs and it can stay at 11.3.
For what reason? Even if you give it Aim-9Js it doesn’t actually fix the issue unless you’re saying it should be an 9L slinger. At which point you just want the thing to go up in BR.
It quite regularly runs into 12.0 aircraft. So yes. it does suffer when you have aircraft able to sling PD missiles at it that you can’t retaliate against besides hoping to multipath it into the ground. Just because you get a match or two where you’re not dealing with Mig-23’s and F-4S’ all over the place, doesn’t make up for 8/10 matches where you get throttled by PD capable aircraft.
Kick it down, or give it CAA and simulated doppler inputs.
So are you saying it should stay at the same BR while having those missiles?
Even against these aircraft… it can still get kills and do fine. Done it myself. It also doesn’t run into 12.0 in my experience much more than what you would normally expect… it still sees plenty of lower BR games. It doesn’t belong at 11.0. It’s better than the aircraft present. The MiG-23 is also not a hard aircraft to beat in the F-4E and the F-4S just requires you to know how to notch or multipath the first missile…
It’s not going anywhere, that’s for sure. It does QUITE well right now.
The argument “just multipath bro / Just notch bro” doesn’t work when you’re having multiple aim-7Fs flying at you from different angles. Mig-23 is objectively better than the F-4E in the missile and radar department which is basically what matters at that point. Just add CAA and simulated doppler inputs and it’ll be fine where it’s at 11.3. I don’t think having the F-4E being forced to face PD aircraft is fun OR fair. Even if you don’t agree it should be 11.0 at least agree it should get CAA and Simulated doppler inputs like it did IRL.
Why do you have this happening to you? You are likely out of position is why. Multipathing also doesn’t care about this at all (angle doesnt matter with MP besides some vertical angles being problematic)
It’s also a higher BR. It’s also not as simple as “its better” as the 23’s radar is also very rudimentary and requires user input (that most users seem to lack the ability to do correctly) to work. It also only gets 2 radar missiles versus your 4 7E2s which while you can say the 24Rs are better missiles, which they are, it is not like 7E2s are also not extremely capable at the BR. Even without PD it is easy to get 7E2 kills.
It’s fine as is without those.
Uptiers suck on any jet, F-4E’s uptiers are not that difficult in my experience. It also again, does not belong at 11.0 and is just better than most aircraft at that point including the F-4EJ which it is just flatout the same jet but better.
Sure, since its historical, but if it raises the performance any you’d have to raise the BR lol, do you really want that
It doesn’t give the F-4E pulse doppler. You’re putting in a speedgate on the missile and when you fire it, it will look for that speed gate. If the enemy moves during it’s time to acquire, the missile will miss. It’s an extremely hacky way of LDSD capability that can be negated by literally turning in a different direction. At the same time, this is in boresight mode. So your nose has to be on the target for your missile to track. Bumping the F-4E up to 12.0 because of it would be insanity
Most people are not launching AIM-7Fs like AMRAAMs or Phoenix’s where you have adequate warning and they’re easy to multipath. They’re using them like longer ranged sidewinders where you have only a few seconds to react in time.
I disagree. The missiles are very capable, just because they aren’t R-27s doesn’t mean they aren’t decent at the BR they are at.
Literal hypocrisy within minutes of each state. You say the F-4C should get AIM-7E-1s and AIM-9Ls because it’s ‘Historical’ while at the same time stating the F-4E shouldn’t get CAA and Simulated doppler inputs even though that would be the historically accurate option.
yeah, thats why I’m looking for them with my eyes and anticipating approach angles based on where they can be in X time from the start of the game. It sounds complicated maybe but all that means is I’m thinking about where people can be and where I should be automatically defending from early game. Late game sparrows become far less of a problem. If I plan to MP I also fly near the deck the entire time… so any sparrow fired is immediately a dud.
About what?
i said that
I never brought up r27s or said the r24r needed to be better, I said the radar on the MiG-23 is rudimentary and problematic for most pilots to use effectively due to the need to be both A. above the target and B. low altitude for the MTI mode to even turn on.
uhm, excuse me? I said 9Js and 7E1s. Very different. Both of those missiles are not insane on fighter aircraft at 10.7 when you consider the F-4C’s downsides.
I literally said it should get them… you should try reading closer.
F-4C is at 10.3 now which is why I suggested originally for it to have flares.
I’ll admit, I misread and apologize, but read my response to Morvan why it wouldn’t make sense to up it in BR to the Mig-23MLD. it would still be worse radar wise than the Mig-23. For it’s LDSD capability to work, you’d need to bank on a lot of factors just for the missile to track and the simulated doppler inputs are a manual process. You have to manually input the right aspect ratio for the missile to track. It’s technically more reliable than CAA as you’re not relying on a computer interpreting ground clutter, but raw input looking for any aircraft that qualifies what the speedgate is looking for. Allies included.
Easy in theory, difficult in practice. Meaning you have to work harder compared to your enemy who more or less performs the same as you with in terms of flight performance and if you get out of that 50m multipath height, you are instantly sparrow food. You can make the same argument if the F-4C was at 11.3.
