even if maneuverability increased it won’t change the fact they have terrible seekers and always will until aim 54 c+ exists.
I mean maneuverability and drags, rocket motors, etc.
Generally, most ARH missiles has too high drags in the game.
only for high altitude launches. most missiles from what I’ve seen generally overperform at sea level which is much more important for war thunder purposes. now idk about aim 54 cause i never looked into it, but for example r-27er or r771 does
In AIM-54A/C cases, drags should be higher on the deck but, should be MUCH lower at mid to high altitude.
AFAIK, they were designed as lofting aggressively and goes over 100,000ft when you launched from over 50nm but, Gaijin didn’t model correct loft profile and makes it shorter range and slower speed missiles.
Of cause they are not good as Fakour-90s but, should be still too annoying in the game.
so basically its what it should be considering this is how gaijin essentially models all missiles. overperform at sea level and underperform at high altitude, because 90 percent of launches are closer to deck than to 10km altitude
At the least, if they fixed just loft profile, 54s would be better for hitting fighters.
Irl 54s should loft like that
It would be ok if they modeled like old Dirby
Edited to reflect the latest update, please notify me if I missed anything.
-Added the F/A-18E AESA EFTs, Su-30SM2, Mig-29N, Su-30MKM, F/A-18D Late, Su-30MKK, J-10C (“early” with AL-31F), Rafale M F3-R, and the JAS39E.
-Added 16.3 as the new top BR.
-Moved Su-30MK2 to 14.3.
-Moved F-15C GE to 15.7
+1 This is a great solution to the biggest problem Air RB has right now. Its insane how compressed it is with all these planes Gaijin added. Realistically speaking Gaijin will only increase the max br to 14.7 in the next update(s).
The F/A-18D Late is just a slightly heavier F/A-18C Late. Should be same BR.
1 Like
Yeah the D doesn’t really bring any advantages worthy of an increase in br.
Fixed.
Typhoon T3s being a lower BR than the Su-30SM2 is a choice.
Nice to see F-15C GE, Gripen E, and Su-30MKM getting the respect they deserve being paired with each other.
J-11B being lower than Mirage 2000 5F is just wrong…
The standard J-10A is also easily on-par with the Mirage 2000 5F.
Better flight performance with a slightly better radar.
Those are quick critiques of the exact top end.
F-2A being the same BR as Gripen Cs is another issue, but I’ll save more comments on the lower stuff for another post in the future if I come back to this.
IMO the flight performance advantage of the Typhoons isn’t enough of an advantage to justify it being the same BR as something with a considerably better loadout (12 R-77-1s>8 Aim-120Bs), and I believe a better radar.
I’ll admit I haven’t played the M2Ks yet, but I based that on their current BRs, and how good MICAs are at the moment.
What do you suggest?
1 Like
You’ll have to convert my numbers into your system.
But the way I see it is this… [ Rule: . = The aircraft between this and the lower BR should be thought over more in regards to both BRs.]
15.3: Rafale, Su-30SM2, F-15C GE, Typhoon T3.
.
JAS39E?
15.0: Su-30SM, Su-30MKM, Typhoon T2, F-15E/I, F-18E.
.
J-10C?
14.7: J-11B, F-15C/BazM/JM, Su-27SM, F-18A Late, F-18C Late, F-18D.
.
Su-30MKK? F-2A? J-10A?
14.3: Su-30MK2, J-11A, Su-34, F-16I Sufa, Mirage 2000 5F/Ei.
14.0: JF-17, F-16D Barak II, Mig-29N, Mig-29SMT, F-16A OCU, F-16AM x2, F-16C Barak II, F-16C, JAS39C.
13.7: F-15A/Baz/J, Su-27, Su-33, F-2A ADTW, J-11, F-16A ADF/MLU.
13.3: Mig-29G, F-16A, Mirage 4000, JAS39A, J-8F, F-16A OCU.
.
F-4F KWK LV? Tornado F3 Late?
13.0: F-14B, F-14A IRIAF, F-5TH TCU, Kfir C10, Sea Harrier FA2, JA37D x2, AV-8B+ x2, F-18A/C.
.
Mirage 2000CS5?
1 Like
16.3 is def wishfull thinking and to much of a jump from the devs pov, but i do think pushing for maybe 15.0 is def more possible and withing the realm of something the devs would actually do.
Good airframe, meta missile count, meta countermeasure count, AESA radar.
The only thing “missing” is the AIM-120C maneuvering, which requires dual plane to be added to the game.
If you gave the F-15C GE AAM-4s or R-77-1s, you’d say it’s 14.3 if your standards are consistent.
15.0 is very easily done.
Either split 13.0 into 2 BRs, or move most 13.7s up to create more room for the premium Su-30s and their counterparts, then move the AESA Typhoons, Su-30SM2, and the Rafales to 15.0. I’d prefer both, and making the max BR 15.3, but at the rate Gaijin decompresses 15.3 will be where the F-35 is placed.
4 Likes
The math in my post is the super easy way of getting to 15.3
Like, yeah there’s a lot of fear in my proposal. A lot of unknowns for player reaction.
Gaijin has extremely valid reasons to fear player backlash. Almost as if there’s a history of it…
We can and do put blame on Gaijin for not seeing what we see, but they also see things we don’t see… not related to balance, but instead related to developer-player interactions.
We only need to look at the recent backlash… against T-series tanks being buffed 0.1 - 0.5 seconds in reload.
If you make a decision you think is good, then you get yelled at by dozens or hundreds of people that you’re being biased for or against something… it’s not going to feel good regardless of how strong you think you are.
F3 Late is entirely dependent on what buffs/fixes are added.
At the moment, id say its about on par with the F-14B. Better equipment, way worse FM.
If we get BOL overhaul and Phimat, it can comfortably be 13.3/13.7 based upon your placements there quite happily.
If it ever needs extra, Aim-120C5s remain an option.
That doesnt include other options in the future like TRDs.
F-4F ICE, I have no idea, but defiently at least 13.3