The problem is that the SEM will never stay at this BR because it is too effective in ground RB.
4 Gbu = 4 kill and no DCA from this BR capable of stopping it effectively. Which will make it completely useless in Air RB already in 10.0 it is one of the weakest planes in the rank.
it will surely go directly to 10.7 because the plane is a much better ground attack plane than the jaguar which only has 2 bombs/missiles.
Especially since increasing the br of the SEM is possible while improving the capacities with the addition of Magic 2 and the Damocles pod.
Never said it was likely but the issue remains with Su-25 and A-10 being what they are at the Br they are at Super Étendard could get Magic II without being game breaking.
Difference being that instead of a US or USSR jet a French jet would be the best of the bunch.
With a difference in capabilities seen in other Br brackets between planes of the same Br as well.
It should be superior and in a ideal decompressed state we would not have to worry about any of that but with CL-13 etc. facing AIM-9L and R-60M either twice or four times two Magic 2 would not make that much of a difference.
The opposite could be true.
Aircraft with decent missiles as well as countermeasures could not harass aircraft without countermeasures quite so easily because they now would have to be mroe carefully controlled as well.
For CL-13 and all the others it makes little difference wether it is a R-60M, AIM-9L or Magic 2.
With 4x R-60M or AIM-9L you still have the greater potential at that Br.
because it isnt just another all aspect, it is an all aspect with irccm, and all of those are over 11.3, so they are actually above certain br… youre using constantlly a false equivalence, in order to suit your narrative, the magic 2 is not equivalent to the aim9l it is to the aim9m or r73, its fligh performance is not equivalent to an su25 , an a6 or an a10, it is equivalent to the sea harriers or the ab8bs. if the magic 2 are added it would have better air to air capabilities most attackers at 11.0 or under…
Which plane does have 4 r60m under 11.0?
but i does to the planes that actually have flares… and a cl13 outperforms the a10s and a6 by a huge margen so they can kill them farely easy, that doesnt happen with the etendard.
The IRCCM either wont matter because of compression or force aircraft with countermeasures to worry about their positioning as much as the ones without. Some fresh air.
The false equivalent is your imagination, never said anything to that effect.
CL-13 is at the same Br as MiG-19 so what?
Magic 2 is available at 11.3 not only above.
SU-25 has R-60M at 10.0.
Super Étendard is a glorified A-10 or SU-25 with better flight performance in turn for less payload.
As far as War Thunder balancing is concerned - LOOKING AROUND THE BR’S- Magic 2 would easily be possible.
You and others are just way to hung up about the IRCCM.
You blind or what?
All aspect at 10.0/10.3 have no IRCCM
MAGIC-II HAVE IRCCM → therefore it need to be at a minimum BR superior of the 2 others.
Please go in Kill probability of those 3 missiles
Magic-2 would be impossible to dodge for no flare aircrafts, due to 35G+IRCCM
The SEM can fly over Mach 1.0 → not possible for Su-25 or A-10 → gives far more energy to the missile at start… → which is the reason why i can dodge AIM-9L/R-60M without flares.
Planes like F-16A and Netz have to compete with AIM-9L against AIM-9M as well as AIM-7M.
Maybe you have issues with your eyes or are not reading what I wrote.
If you don’t have countermeasures to begin with it wont matter wether the missile fired at you has IRCCM or not.
Kill probability at that Br soley depends wether you know when to fire a missile. Even if you fire at aircraft with countermeasures. Timing and positioning is everything.
In performance Magic 1/2 are between R-60/M and AIM-9L so what is the issue?
Every sane person, would know that Magic-2 under 10.7 BR is the death of those BR,…
You’re actually trying to have something you can’t have for said BR.
Adding AS.30L or AM.39 are not worth a BR upgrade, but Magic-2 is different,… by far.
1st of all because:
Having Magic-2 means the aircraft will got Magic-1 instantly as stock option.
That it will be able to ignore Flares → 100% guaranteed kill at those BR
Magic-2 is currently going through a whole rework program for the game, thanks To @MiG_23M and @DirectSupport and will be decently close to the AIM-9M abilities soon enough, and maybe with more G’s, if Gaijin consider adding Dual plane steering.
Well, it should have much better range, 50G, improved IRCCM, guidance delay <0.2s, and we’re trying to find more solid information on the motor because we suspect 2s burn time is not remotely accurate, should be more like 5-6s if I’m right.
Oh, and proximity fuse arming time should be <1.2s for Magic 2 I’d think.
Well the same imbalance exists at top tier currently what is the issue?
The Br range we are talking about already is ruined by compression.
The 100% hit rate also seems rather unlikely.
The issue is IRCCM since we already have all aspect of similar performance at 10.0 on aircraft with similar performance.
IRCCM will only affect aircraft which have countermeasures. So what?
What people think doesn’t matter.
I’m of course refering to Magic 2 in it’s current form.
Saying it’s not a reason to add more of that would have made sense BEFORE the 10.0 strike aircraft were added.
F.1C is not Super Étendard. And in a downtier it is a good jet certainly even if it had only Magic 1.
Again I know it is unlikely but at this point I do not see the issue with Super Étendard with the current Magic 2.
Now that the Italian AMX exists with a bigger bomb load (both guided and unguided), all aspects on the wingtips that don’t interfere with bomb loadouts, a French thermal TGP, & an EEGS system for a vulcan all at only .3 BR higher than the Super Etendard, I don’t think its unreasonable for the Super Etendard to receive a better TGP, AS-30Ls or Magic 2s.
I don’t see it getting Magic-IIs due to their current efficacy even without the acknowledged bugs getting fixed, but the lack of AS-30Ls is confusing to say the least.
You would be halving the number of precision guided munitions (PGMs) compared to the GBU-12s on the SEM, and existing aircraft at equal or lower BR can carry PGMs of similar efficacy or even more of the same PGMs. The AGM-62ER makes light work of most anti-air, and is as low as 8.7 to 9.3 on the ISR/USA A-4s, or the US A-6 being able to carry double the number of GBU-12s compared to the SEM, or even multiple Kh-25MLs / Kh-29Ls on some USSR attackers.