you are not going to stay above mach 1 in a dogfight
You wont even need manual. Just hold S till you gain position, then.you manage your energy a bit et voilà.
I’m not saying that but I am likely to gain the advantage before we go below Mach 1…
Which is quite the deceisive thing to do, easily negating any STR disadvantages.
so it is like f-16 vs f-18 irl whoever is the one that exploits his jets advanteges better wins
It always is like that yes. Eurofighter has a hard time in the sorry state it’s in right now.
A lot has to happen before you can take advantage of a superior STR low and “slow”.
And in the current meta. Rafales AESA and MICA beat out the Typhoons Buggy M-Scan and AMRAAM at this time.
well then you better learn how to exploit the EF flight model
we were talking pure flight perforamnce
missiles and avionics were out of the picture
Right after Storm Warning I had 2:1 on all 3 Eurofighters and a 2.5:1 on Rafale.
After the last update the only Eurofighter I played was the British one. It now sits below 2:1 while Rafale now sits at a 3:1.
If I check other players in random matches I see this gap widen even more. You do see better stats on Rafale accross the board.
More people are negative on Eurofighter than on Rafale.
Rafale is simply superior at the moment outside of obscure low energy rate fights.
If such a rate fight should occur and no enemy is left to missile you out of the sky beware of your teammates’ missiles…
being negative in either of them is a huge skill issue imo
you mean: enemies in blue?
So what?
Generally yes but I meant to highlight your average chances of survival after you classically won a rate fight.
i was just stating my opinion
Is there a game mode where we fly guns only?
Maybe we should also take 3 mins fuel too.
The problem is, people use pure flight performance as justification for the typhoon not to get buffs/missing features even though pure flight performance is largely irrelevant to a certain degree at top tier
I don’t know but people are saying it was in Coningsby (?) 2013-2015. Should probably take with grain of salt
Is it enough to interview a eurofighter pilot and ask if the missiles can be equipped in those pylons? Or is it not enough for gaijin
Nope, pilot statements aren’t accepted as sources. You’d prolly need an engineer that worked on the plane or similiar
Okay what about walking around the plane, and having the pilot pointing out that a mfrl launcher is compatible with the inner wing pylons. By showing the hard point connection or something
That won’t help. We’ve already proven that the pylon is compatible with AMRAAMs. Gaijin wants a source that explicitly confirms that they are actually used on that pylon