Python 4s been in files for over a year its so funny. And yes I 100% agree with you and putting these missiles on an event vehicle would be fitting as there would be a limited window for all the players to obtain it rather than putting it in one nation unfairly. I think even though the airframe would be mediocre at 13.7/14.0 you’d only get at max 4 of these missiles if you sacrificed having any ARH missiles at all. I compared it to the SU25BM since it got R73’s before the update had came out and was used as a kind of “test bed” for IRCM missiles in AIR RB (besides the magics but they were severely nerfed before the update). I’m really hoping we don’t get them all in an update and have every aircraft be a new version of aircraft already in the game then shoving them to 14.7 as I feel that would kind of be a cheap cop out, but who knows it might be kind of needed with things like MICA IR coming in the near future.
It’s good to chart aircraft performance.
J-8F isn’t a brick. If it retains energy above 14 degrees per second, it’s not a brick.
Otherwise you’re close to calling F-15E a brick just cause it retains energy worse than a Mig-29.
J-8F’s BR is correct and balanced, there’s nothing artificial about it.
All the aircraft in my posts I’ve used personally.
@SolareHQ
Mig-19 retains energy like an F-16, comparing them to J-8s is not healthy.
You’ve put no games in Kfirs, you’ve put no games in non-premium Phantoms. If you’re going to mention your own record, I’m going to fact-check your record.
With AMRAAMs, Kfir is a mediocre 13.0 until the F-15s, Su-27s, etc get moved to 13.3, then Kfir becomes an average 13.0 as there are still one or two superior options.
Begging for Kfir C10 to be 14.x+ with Python 4s makes no sense cause its flight performance is Phantom levels without the missile load.
I didn’t mention retaining energy I said it turns. Energy retention is only relevant to a certain point when considering higher tiered vehicles, especially when it comes at sacrificing turn rate. Also why would it matter if I use a premium phantom or a regular one? especially in America where the only other phantom that’s relevant is the F-4E as its better at CAS. Why would I go through stock grinding objectively worse phantoms like the F-4J or using the shit box that is the F-4C? (I forgot it was moved down it might actually be relevant now)
Also despite my record I have put in around 50+ games in a spaded F-4F ICE and plenty in the Kfir Canard as well as the mirage 3, not that its very relevant as the Kfir block 60 is heavily upgraded and would be similar in comparing game experience in something like an AV-8C to the AV-8B plus.
I also didn’t say I wanted it to be 14.0+ I did however say 13.7/14.0 depending on its performance in game, which could be comparable to giving something like the SU25BM R-73s as its has a bad flight performance and is artificially raised by its weapon loadouts. It would also be a unique event vehicle with unique weaponry for a while that would help in deciding how to proceed with additions like the AIM-9X, R-74, etc.
Testing a new generation of IR missiles on something as ridiculous as an F-15 or Su27 would be ridiculous and would result in them being under tiered/overtired like they were on release last time.
Also I thought of another good example for a recently removed feature for balance which is the brimstones not having IR guidance… so idk what that comment was about
@SolareHQ
Energy retention has nothing to do with sacrificing turn rate.
F-4E is trash at CAS in ground RB, utter garbage and that movement of goalposts is irrelevant to this discussion.
New gen IR missiles will be tested on new tech tree vehicles, not event vehicles.
Turn fast = looking other direction faster, thus having to gain speed in THAT direction. This is not a game mechanic this is just physics and the J-8F has good energy retention because of how slowly it turns. Facing off against a monster 1 circle fighter with Derby’s is a good way to get a guaranteed loss.
Also I’ve used the F-4E in GRB and its completely fine I have no idea what you’re on about, you can take 6 AGM 65’s on it as well as 2 TV guided bombs at a decently low BR, its better than something like the F-5E or A10 at that BR. Only thing that’s bad on it is the radar but the missiles just guide themselves most of the time once they’re close enough so it’s not that big of a deal.
Also Gaijin literally has a history with testing new weaponry on event vehicles like the FJ-4B, Object 292, Tornado IDS MFG (AS.34 not that they’re very useful as of now), SU25BM, F14IRIAF, etc. This is not a new concept for them whatsoever and can help in making decisions in adding these weaponry to the game.
@SolareHQ
10Gs over 2x degrees per second is not “turn slowly”.
Kfir is not and has never been a “1 circle plane” against anything other than early cold war fighters not designed for it.
292, Tornado IDS, and FJ-4B weren’t tests.
What?? The mirage 3/5 and all its subsequent upgraded exports and variants are 1 circle fighters, its literally a delta wing fighter that loses all its energy if the fight goes on too long so idk what you’re talking about. Also the J-8F cant even pull 7g’s at 700km/h meanwhile the Kfir can pull 9+
The 292 is a test for 150mm cannons/APFSDS in the game, the FJ-4B got the first mouse guided ATGM, and the tornado IDS was a test for advanced anti-ship missiles (which are still useless to this day).
Mirage 5’s peak G limit is 9, anything that pulls more than 9Gs will out-circle it.
292 is not a test for APFSDS and 150mm cannons, neither are new to the game and have been in the game for years.
Mouse guided ATGMs were in the game before FJ-4B.
And anti-ship guidance was not new.
And no lineup too…
Dude; no one deserves jack crap in a ftp game.
Just a cool visual effect that works pretty well for you to not be seen by CAS.
f4e is not very good in cas, much rather bring a7e with lantirn and agm62er
Get out of here. If we use your logic, then why are you complaining about it? Put up with it. Everyone knows this is only free-to-play in name, anyway.
The mirage 3 and all the further developments are one circle fighters, it always has been. I’m not gonna sit here and try to argue with someone who is trying to say the Mirage is a rate fighter because you’re just so wrong its funny. And I don’t know if I mentioned this but the Kfir isn’t a mirage 5, its heavily upgraded and pulls harder than the mirage 5.
I really didn’t think I’d need to say this as I thought it was fairly obvious but I meant prototype 150mm cannons on modern MBT’s, or the NATO counterpart 140mm prototypes, which I really thought was obvious but I guess not.
The FJ-4B was the first aircraft to get mouse guided ATGM’s on an aircraft, so yet again wrong.
And the Tornado has the most advanced anti-ship guided missiles in the game, there isn’t/wasn’t anything else like it in the game and its useless as is but Gaijin added it just to test advanced anti-ship missiles and their performance in the game (ARH+IOG guided).
It’s much slower and doesn’t have really good self defense against other aircraft, and I much prefer ATGM’s for dealing with things like SPAA while having the two IR guided bombs to take out heavier targets like MBT’s capping points. I also think the A7E will be much worse after the TOR-M1 got moved to 11.0, but the only thing about the F4E now I don’t like is that America has no 11.0 ground vehicles anymore, so you need to either bring a 10.7 or 11.3 lineup.
@SolareHQ
Then don’t try to say Mirage is a rate fighter.
However, you should really check my Mirage 3 performance before looking down on me.
Unlike you, I have a hilarious amount of experience in all the vehicles I’m mentioning.
Object 292 isn’t an MBT. It lacks machine guns, smoke grenades, and other aspects of MBTs. Object 292 is a tank destroyer “nerfed” with the medium tank classification.
at least the t80 is russian and will therefore work unlike the literally unusable luchs
Do you know what rate fighter means? You’re implying by saying its not a 1 circle fighter that it prefers the 2 circle, which otherwise is known as a rate fight. YOU SAID THAT not me. Don’t try to lecture me on experience with a vehicle when you don’t even understand the basics of it.
The object 292 was literally developed of the chassis of another Russian MBT being the T80U and in the unclassified information about the vehicle they literally call it an experimental MBT.
@SolareHQ
I’m saying that in the context of air RB, talking about specific 1v1 jargon does not matter; this is the only thing I’ve said on that subject.
One day you might understand the Mirage 3/5 platform.
The object 292 we have in-game is not an MBT, it’s an Object 120 with a fire control system, armor and a better round.
The Mirage 3 was designed as an interceptor in the late 50s, I’m not saying it excels at dogfighting but I am saying it is a one circle fighter. There is no question about this, its a delta winged aircraft that loses more energy and position as the fight goes on. The Kfir block 60 is much better in this role than its predecessors due to upgrades in avionics and engine power, it still maintains the fact that it performs better in the one circle fight, especially with HMD and Derby’s/Python 3’s. I understand the platform very well and what it was designed for.
What would your definition of an MBT be because I’d define it as a heavily armored, high firepower, good mobility tank with lower weight than a super heavy tank, which is how its been defined since the Chieftain was put into production, and the Object 292 fits all of those criteria. No one has ever Its literally a T80U with a 152mm cannon instead of the 125, that’s it.
Here is literally a definition straight from the OSCE defining modern MBT’s
The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe defines a main battle tank as “a self-propelled armored fighting vehicle, capable of heavy firepower, primarily of a high muzzle velocity direct fire main gun necessary to engage armored and other targets, with high cross-country mobility, with a high level of self-protection, and which is not designed and equipped primarily to transport combat troops.”
What role does the Object 292 not fulfill within that definition and where does it say you need machine guns or smoke grenades to function as an MBT. The reason it probably doesn’t have those things is because it never entered production and was only a prototype vehicle, which was still made to be an MBT. Not to mention its NATO counterparts like the leopard 140mm would be most likely lacking some of these aspects as well, and was also still designed to fulfill the roll of an MBT, not a TD.