Interesting
I have a feeling that they will change it for all gatewidth-type IRCCM missiles …
1 Like
Smin siad in R&R each of the other missiles would need separate report proving this capability.
The best plane in the game keeps on becoming more and more powercreep.
well smin said only for magic 2 soooo.
He just updated his statement
He updated that
2 Likes
3 Likes
I’m not sure what the tag was about then.
After it was raised yesterday to ask about the fix it was checked and expanded to all missiles with an FoV IRCCM.
1 Like
It was a little light-hearted joke and the tag was to … Well … “share the joke with you” …
Spoiler
Only missiles that dont use suspension tracking IRRCM though?
So no changes to the 9M
I mean it’s a correction of gatewidth IRCCM systems so i don’t see why there should be changes to track supension IRCCM missiles.
Exactly so it’s a buff to R-73 and Magic 2…
While Aim9M gets no improvements, none of the accepted bug reports actioned.
1 Like
I don’t know why you go into every thread and moan you got to threads that have nothing do with the topic at hand. You should be know by now there is no rhyme or reason to how stuff gets implemented there are bug reports like 6 years ago that are yet to materialise
2 Likes
And R-27T/ET, PL-5EII, PL-8B
While I do not agree with Gaijin sitting on reports for years as a “balancing factor” (or perhaps not wanting to spend money to hire enough devs so that reports don’t sit in the queue for several years), AIM-9M is not that terrible either, at least in SB, thanks to its smokeless motor.
They probably should remove the missile markers mechanic from RB, as it’s disproportionally disadvantageous for missiles with smokeless motors.
2 Likes
Just more buffs to Gaijins favourite jet. Magic 2 was already a fantastic missile did it need a buff?
9M isn’t terrible but at the ranges you want to use it the having it properly modelled would be nice.
I hadnt factored in the R-27ET thats going to be nasty