Unfortunately I can not and I would if I could, however I am extremely grateful for this game and do not take it for granted for it is not a bad “Simulator” at all but it lacks in certain areas compared to others.
This is also the first public platform/game which simulates the Rafale which is just Wow.
I mean, it shouldnt. 8 is fine until they are fixed and they should be. Then they can be removed if balance is issue or removed from wingtips so we are forced to use magic there.
so you have considered Indian Rafale C and B F.3R : ok, fine by me
now about MICA’s Range:
Not even considered yet - sources: 2 books - 4 months ago
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/guhaDQj6ga6j
From DirectSupport
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/alf1Hlrk1Ap6
→ forwarded as suggestion (why?) - 6 months ago
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/OoskoLXRLTgx
→ accepted, still not fixed - 5 months ago
if you wanted some sources, you have plenty with those 3 Bug reports, on which they seem to all agree that 50km range is currently a fake value put in place for undisclosed reasons,…
i feel like Gaijn should currently make this job prior to add the MICA SP3 Pylons., as innacuracies are currently making the MICA-EM range to be 37.5% subpar to IRL Model
Well that is a different discussion and it’s regarding the realistic performance of the MICA-EM which it should undoubtedly get no matter what, so it is more a matter of pumping out as much legal evidence regarding it and harassing until we get it fixed.
Theres no discussion that they should behave as they do in real life.
Send bug reports and me and many others will upvote if it is proper.
As mentioned above, MICA performance reports are under review. They are not connected to the x 8 loadout.
Every playtest report about ARH was being passes as suggestion at that time. Its not special to MICA
I guess we need to remove the Mirage 4000 from the game ASAP. It was after all a Dassault aircraft that was never sold to anybody. The French Airforce never used such an aircraft…
Same for the AMX 32 and AMX 40. Since they obviously did not enter service !
The initial outcry for the 8 MICA pylons was that only testbeds used them. It was later shown that no, some F3R did test them. Dassault built and proposed 8 MICA variant, that France did not adopt until the F4. There are no major structural change between F3 and F4.1 (only F4.2 brings significant structural changes to improves it’s lifetime). Thus, according to Gaijin’s methods, 8 missiles is completely fair
and i understood that : what i am currently suggesting is to work out this problem as MICA-EM is the ONLY missile from top tier to not have recieved it’s true max range, being held back by 37.5%
also i’m trying to discuss here, not willing to make a fuss ^^"
The Rafale feels quite great now, the only downside is the impossibilty to fly at regulated speeds with ab (even at 102%) without breaking the wings
No removing of the amount. if in real life it carries 8, let it carry 8, no matter the performance.
But lets keep harassing for MICA performance to get fixed.
Casually ignoring PL-12 and R-77
Please, just dont consider them fine as rafale gets 8. You can always remove 2 of them or ability to carry it on wingtips if fixed mica becomes balance issue in that increased number. Afterall, we all would be fine with correct mica and having “only” 6 of them.
You can rip at 101% as well, if you fly completely straight for a minute. I am learning to use super cruise most of the time and switch to afterburner only in turn fights
Sry i had wrong tag, even then, iam fine with 6 of AdA if it means they are correct. They should be pretty damn good so you can actually use that AESA radar with them in BVR with decent PK.
Yeah, that’s quite infuriating
I did not ace it now, with all the modif, whats the max kph speed at deck in supercruise?
Well…if we are given 2 additional Mica because of their testing by Dassault, then I have a question:
Were the AASM-1000 tested on the Rafale F3, for installation under the central pylon instead of the GBU-24?
I am 110% with you but I just do not stand with artificial nerfs & buffs.
The community whine destroys this game and WHEN micas get real performance we BETTER have the real amount as well.
BECAUSE if you manage to die to any fox 3 when there is a 100% safe shield from fox 3s when you fly low… it is a skill issue as always.
This is not directed to you fyi, just to people who whine about missiles being too good if they are behaving realistically.
Removing the beautiful wingtip pylons from any plane is basphemy, if it was a balance concern they can just remove the extra pylons post buff.
Its not though, if that fox3 comes from really high altitude under angle and you dont time it well with maneuvering, it will smack you anyway, no matter your altitude. It might not outright kill you but often, you wont return or wont be even able to shoot back.
Yea, Magics on wingtips are ugly as sin. Rather remove pylons :D