i think he means at a stationary target at 80 km, kinda like how mica vl has a 20km range against (I think?) a stationary target
That doesn’t make any sense and that is not how a2a missiles are tested
Unless he shows something that proves that this is how France tested their missile, there is nothing suggesting that the mica is majorly underperforming
pretty sure its underperforming under the mica vl launch conditions (0 speed 0 alt)
What i’m showing is that Gaijin uses (like you do) a different method for French missile and US missiles:
IRL ADVERTIZED RANGES of both AIM-120B and MICA-EM are 70-80km
YET IN GAME: the AIM-120A reaches 80.6km Traveled Distance and MICA-EM only reaches 50.6km
therefore, Gaijin is using (as you do) a Double standard.
- Missiles are defined by the Range they are REACHING, and not firing From, as demonstrated with AIM-120.
OR, and this would chnages how the game is played at lower BR - SUPER530D Missiles should be able to fire from 80km range and reach their target aswell. (and Super 530F from 65km)
Ah,… double standards,… the way to nerf the best systems of the world.
0 speed launch. not majorly underperforming tho. idrc bout range, just the maneuverability part. although, the way gaijin modeled the entire missile is wrong tbh.
You know that the aim120b isn’t modeled after some claims made on some wiki
It was model after testing data from the British MoD
So unless you have an unclassified document saying otherwise, there is no indication of the mica majorly underperforming
that’s MICA-VL : Directsupport made calculation from that as they’re are the same missile missile as MICA-EM, to demonstrate the MICA-EM lack Kinectics.
That isn’t properly testable ingame due to the fact that we don’t have a surface launched mica ingame currently
you can launch a mica vertically from a 0 speed at ground level using custom mission, and it’s underperforming for that. although, i’d rather it lose its sustainer and become even more optimized for short range like it is irl because its boost only (this would make its long range performance worse)
The biggest problem is probably the woble of the missile
Which gaijin has to fix for all TVC missiles sooner or later
30G at long ranges isn’t that bad.
i mean AIM-120 only have 35G
no it would lose speed faster if it was modeled with boost only (after the booster ran out) because the sustainer helps it well, sustian speed. but it would get even more nasty acceleration. so it would be worse at long range than it is rn, but the trade off is even better close range performance if it was accurately modeled
that wouldnt neccesarily make it better at shor ranges
because more accelaration means the missile has a harder time turning, even with TVC
i mostly mean time to react, because unless youre shooting from like sub 2 km high off bore, this would just mean the person notching has less time to react
as if MICA-EM is,… It was deliberatly under-modelized by gaijin because it would have become an easy missile to use in any situation,… Making Magic-2 even more Useless, and making players to ask more for MICA-IR to get IR seeking missile to choose outside of MICA-EM
it would become worse at longer range than it is rn if it was modeled accurately? idek why people ask for 80 km, like you’re getting no kills at those ranges. what people should really want is better acceleration instead of range
i don’t see why : the MICA-EM is having different PID than IR variant,…
50G would remain for at least 18km (on air launched MICA-EM), and taking about 30G after that range for the 1st pull. it would make it up to 60km, then decreasing to 0G at 80km
there’s no way it’s reaching 18 km in 4.75 seconds (it needs thrust vectoring to pull 50gs)
4.75 seconds is roughly the time of the motor is active
thats what you implied
it already is ingame the Mica EM is by far the best missile currently
anyone that isnt AFK will not be hit by a MICA launched at anything more than 30km
not even if gaijin increases max range
50G is due to TVR (Thrust Vectoring) - so that’s about right