i ask myself that every time i open the warthunder forums tbh
1 Like
Especially in threads like this one. Title plus 2 sentences ending with a question "should this be buffed?
2 Likes
real
“The Flugabwehrraketensystem Roland auf Radkraftfahrzeug, should it be buffed?”
2 Likes
“Hullo my plane is facing ARHs, namely premium sukhois and i think it deserves its BR lowered”
1 Like
becoming a common issue these days, i wonder why…
Complete mystery that premium sukhois seems to affect only whatever aircraft poster is playing and not the entire BR range.
1 Like
It’s even a reserve squadron
Aim-7 is overall fine. Maybe the Aim-7 versions that loft where appropriate but otherwise its fine. Also getting Mutlipathing set on a per missile basis would be good too, which would increase the differences between the Aim-7F and Aim-7M
Aim-9 is more complicated.
The biggest issue is that heat signatures are not modeled properly, and this results in all missile being waaaaaaay too easy to flare. Aim-9L for example should basically be unflarable if the target is on reheat, even vs large calibre flares (based upon an RAF test and we have the primary docs for it). That would be a notable buff for the Aim-9L.
You also have the dechriped Aim-9Ls that Britain could get that would notably extend lock ranges.
Aim-9M also needs a few buffs, such as improving the IRCCM, increasing the lock ranges and reducing the IOG Drift.
IRCCM? Im pretty sure only one Aim-9 is packed up with IRCCM.
Not IRCCM in the same way that the Aim-9M, R-73 or Magic II are, just better flare resistance.
Yeah, we need something like that. And plus it loses speed, very, very fast.
would prefer if 9L didnt hard lock things to 10.7 minimum, planes like the hawk 200 and sea harrier are pretty useless for ARB at that BR.
7P id like to see be available on more aircraft. its only really on the premium hornets at the moment and it could be expanded a fair chunk more than it is currently
You’re telling me, that an AIM-9L should perform the same as a missile with thrust vectoring that made the US start development of the AIM-9X?
Are you insane?
americans had thrust vectoring IR missiles before the r73 with the aim95 agile. they even saw the incredible advantage then but due to costs and it not being able to adapt to the platforms without expensive retooling and adapters it lost infavor of the 9L which was lighter and cheaper to build while being able to mount to anything given a hard point
Actually, they started developing the ASRAAM with the UK and Germany based upon the premise that modern IIR wouldnt be defeatable and if you and your opponent fired at the same time, then you would both die, so its better to fire first and kill first.
Germany left for their own reasons and went on to develop the IRIS-T. The US also eventually pulled out, due to a combination of political pressure to develop a native weapon and to economic pressure to use up the existing stockpile of 30k Aim-9Ms. So the Aim-9X was developed initially as just an upgrade for the Aim-9M, adding the new seeker and TVC, but re-using as much as possible of the Aim-9M.
Whilst there was of course a certain degree of consideration for what it would be facing, and ensureing it would outperform the R-73… The Aim-9X was actually just a recycling project at its core and is a large reason why the Aim-9X is weaker than a lot of the more purpose built IIR missiles.
You mean AMRAAM, right?
BUFF the 7P? Are you nuts?
It’s the second-best SARH missile IN THE GAME at 12.7.
9M buff? Meh, but honestly no.
Wait WHAT? its the second best?! Since when?