CAC Sabre / CA-27 (A jet that should have been added years ago)

They could have been added with CL13B Mk6. This was the same patch that introduced the T-2K.

1 Like

Would still be relevant now at the UK doesn’t have a competent fighter past 8.7 until the Gripen.

Definitely would be fantastic to see still and worthwhile.

Its a shame the Hunters are all too high BRed

They’re at their proper BRs more or less, the game is just compressed. There is no shot in hell the Hunter F.1 would be fine at 8.7 killing F-84Gs in downtiers. If it wasn’t fine to downtier it to 8.7 back when it came out (it was one of the best jets at the time lol) then it isn’t ok now.

Yeah, though at the same time, the Hunters are also not fun at their current BRs because of the 10s you face. It is totally a compression issue, you are right, they cant go down anywhere, but at the same time, they need to :D


When it came out its rivals were different, its niche wasn’t filled. If they kept the same br’s permanently the game would be a shit show the aircraft is not worthy of its BR. Sweden has literally got a better version at the same br.

Its much more comparable to 8.7 aircraft than it is to 9.0s, it is in no way equal to a Cl-13Mk.5, F-2 sabre or Lim-5P. Perhaps in the past it was but it has been nerfed since and other aircraft rebalanced/buffed. The only advantages it has going for it is that it has a high burst mass and its fast-ish, fast depending on what it’s facing.

If they want to add the P…1109B at 9.0 to replace it then i’m all for it but you can’t just refuse to alter br’s because it was added at a different one originally not sure what sort of argument that is.

Agreed, although i’m torn on the Mk.6 i’d much rather it lost the SRAAM’s and wen’t to 9.0 and the P.1109B went at 9.3 with its red tops.

Yeah, we’ll have to see what they are like after their overhaul (if it ever happens)

Would be funny if the FGR phantoms got SRAAM’s as their ‘all-aspect’ missile at 11.3…

Anyway I digress off topic.

1 Like

Compression doesn’t solve compression. Hunter F1 is not at all fair to fight 7.7-8.3 regularly.

I agree.

Now I disagree, the Lim-5P, or the Mig-15bis, or the Cl-13 or the F-2. The difference is the Hunter is drastically worse than the aforementioned aircraft.

The Hunter F.1 is much better balanced against 8.7 aircraft than those at 9.0. At 8.7 its only advantage would be its top speed, which firstly it cannot achieve because the fuel load is either too low to reach your top speed on one refuel, or at 18 minutes where it quite literally cannot reach its top speed for 15 whole minutes.

I’m sure we agree the only advantage of the Hunter is its speed. It’s burst mass is from the ADEN’s but those are easily dodgeable and the Hunter cannot pull into people who dodge headons. However at 8.7 the G/91 is only 50km/h slower whilst having better fuel loadouts, missiles, maneuverability, acceleration and T/W.

I don’t know what aircraft you’re basing off at 8.7 that would make you think the Hunter is 9.0 material when at 9.0 there are aircraft that do literally everything better than it.


15bis is a mix of being possibly slightly undertiered as well as simply being a very versatile aircraft regarding its flight characteristics

CL13 Mk5 is fine at 9.0 and I don’t think it invalidates the Hunter at all.

I have zero idea how this somehow affects the hunter since you didnt go into detail

It definitely isn’t just top speed… it has very good guns, very good speed, very good MER, good accel for that BR and type of aircraft etc. Good ratefighting, etc. It wasn’t fine to face 7.7s in 2019 and it isn’t now either.

LAUGHABLE. Sorry, but stop looking at stat cards. The G.91 I can assure you is not just “80kph slower”. The G.91 struggles to break 1000kph sometimes.

Name them, you haven’t done so yet.

1 Like

Better in almost every way top speed is the only issue which is pretty irrelevant when it takes the hunter 3/4 of the map to reach its top speed.

Much better bar guns and top speed again.

Its only tangible advantage is being able to run away, and considering its famous for compressing at high speed and causing crashes, i’m sure you can imagine how well it does at dodging aim-9b’s.

Which it can’t aim because it struggles to pull any significant amount of lead or G.

its the best at its br. when its on min fuel or has been flying for 10-15 minutes.

it has absolutely horrible acceleration until the other aircraft literally start to hit their airframe limits.

By that logic so is everything else at it’s br which pretty much universally outclass it.

I took it into a test drive before writing this. On min fuel which you can actually take in a Gina because it has reasonable fuel loads. I hit 1080 after using 3 minutes of fuel.

Cl-13 Mk.5, Lim-5P, Mig-17, and before you say top speed. you can’t hit it min-fuel and you can’t hit it unless you have used 10 mins of fuel when taking 18. And lets not even be patronising by suggesting that its acceleration or turn rate are good.

If I could only pull 5g’s below 1000 I’d expect to be rate fighting well considering I can’t turn tightly enough to sheer of speed.

We agree is has good guns (irrespective of whether you can aim them or now), we also agree it has a speed advantage over other aircraft at the br (even though it isn’t considerable). But where we don’t agree is on how that could possibly make it worthy of being 9.0.

You seem to forget that if a Hunter is downtiered there are other aircraft also downtiered on the enemy team which will almost entirely outperform it.

Hell it wasn’t even a good airframe for dogfighting IRL but more better as it could carry suspended armament.

I disagree but to move on and bring on another point, the Hunter also doesn’t have to be better than the CL13A Mk5 in any way to be at the same BR. Ideally that would be the case but the amount of decompression to achieve that will never happen with gaijin at the helm. Even so, it is already pretty comparable in overall performance once all stats are accounted for…people very much overrate the CL13A Mk5 is my experience.

Except, the F-86F-2 is just a F-86F-25 with better guns. The Hunter F1 has similar flight performance overall again, accounting for all stats involved.

You don’t know the Hunter then. It has extremely good MER in the horizontal and can ratefight many planes and easily win. It also DOESN’T have nearly as bad of accel as you’re claiming.

easily, if you die to 9Bs in anything short of an IL-28 you are at fault.

I am them fine. Anticipate enemy movements, control your energy/speed, and take good lines.

Massively exaggerating accel being bad (It’s literally at the very least average for the BR)

Look, I’ll even be willing to listen if you find data that supports this but nothing has ever drawn this conclusion for me.

?? What does its BR have to do with not compressing the game further

That’s cool but also not at all the point. The G.91 simply does not go, on average accounting for all scenarios in a game, go anywhere near as fast as the Hunter does. The G.91 has bad MER. The Hunter has good MER.

Relevant to this, you don’t own the G.91, I do. I also own the Hunter. I also own the MiG-15bis AND the CL13 we talked about earlier. In fact I also own the F-86F-40 variants and the F-86F-2 to compare too.

Ratefighting efficiency is not at all related to the pilot’s skill in managing their own turn. You sound like you full pull yank the stick binary on/off in every direction.

Ehh I think 9.3 with or without missiles from the explanation it’s just a better f86f (20mm one). Would be unbalanced at 9.0

Honestly, I never thought I’d see a discussion of CL-13 Mk.5 in 2024 lmao.

CL-13A was indeed decent aircraft in 9.0, but the reason it was OP was due to the lack of counterparts on the enemy team and unbalanced matchmakers.

When CL was implemented in the game, it was untouchable because Germany was counted as red team in matchmaker and, NATO team didn’t have Hunter.

Balance has been pretty decent since MiG-17 and Hunter came in around 2015, but became OP again in 2018 because matchmaker was changed to WW2 style Axis vs Allies from NATO vs Red team/mixed and event FJ4B spam.

I don’t think its OP I just think its better than the Hunter F.1. As i’ve already said the Hunters only advantage is its absolute top speed which it can’t reach on a full fuel load. The MER argument only applies because it quite literally cannot turn hard enough.

I don’t think any of the planes I’ve mentioned are OP, just better than the Hunter. If they switched its fuel load to something reasonable like 10 minutes then whatever but for now, its still a brick (as it was IRL) which is worse than the 9.0 mainstays and much more in line with 8.7’s.

Funny since this doesn’t matter at all regarding MER and I already explained that

the CL13B Mk6 is bullshit enough already, it’s only direct competitor in a pure 1v1 is the Ariete. MiG19 is a close by if the nr30s didn’t behave like plinkers 50 percent of the time. No thanks.