There is no mechanism for that though, since vehicle limiting only occurs in RB in full down-tiers predicating reserved rungs at top BRs for unbalanced vehicles to sit by themselves to avoid compression, though limiting their quantitative advantage, I just am and questioning what the next step would be since AMRAAMs aren’t ready yet, considering the response to the MiG-29 doing poorly for all of three days post release was the -27ER, not the R-73, it’s not like they can hand out the -9X or a HMD(to each F-15) so its obvious that the established precedent is not an option for said F-15s, and it runs counter to the later addition of AMRAAM capable variants.
Seriously though what is the next option Skip forward to the F-22, F-35? Restore the balance What of the other nations that don’t have such a wide array of intermediary options so would nominially rely on ordnance updates, and so the next step cases yet larger performance deltas, even if Gaijin were to Hyper-focus on bloating the trees out with minor additions as best they could (e.g. numerous Challenger 2 / M1 variants, with minor variations and tweaks), but for aircraft, at least more so then they already are with the Tranches of C&P airframes that they have been.
The point I’m making is that things are entirely out of order for the way Gaijin’s Symmetric balancing, The only thing the Su-27 lacks is guided A2G ordinance, which is a minor issue and practically irrelevant. The closest performing airframe is probably the F-14, and even then is arbitrarily constrained by a lower BR to couldn’t get contemporary ordnance let alone the lack of utility features like the HMD( VTAS II & -III was trialed by F-14A-90s) and various issues with the radar and other utility features (AN/ALR-23, AN/AXX-1, etc.) to keep pace with the new addition. and the other nations are in an even worse spot since their limited offerings either don’t have the legs or are stuck with Sparrows of all things for the most part.
The entire point of the timeline argument is point out that if things were balanced based on year of introduction / First flight / IOC etc. , practically the entirely of toptier would be the other way around, with NATO / US not having to fight with a 5~30 year handicap would practically smoke the opposition from BVR endlessly past 8.3 or so when missiles show up (AIM-7E-2 or -7F vs R-3R is not an even match up), even with the currently modeled inaccuracies in features and ordnance.
and further in this explicit case, the F-15A in question would be facing off against the MiG-23ML / -23MLD / MiG-21Bis, maybe an early MiG-29 or two depending on which configuration(s) the F-15 is in.
Especially considering for example that there are few modeled differences between the AIM-7F and -7M at this point, many of the potential differences are practically irrelevant, provisions were provided for Countermeasures from the airframes introduction, but they were not fitted until later so for the same reason the ML gets their strake dispenser rack; a hypothetical F-15A (Introductory) / Early could as well.
The Maps, Objectives and Matchmaker causing specific issues doesn’t help either, but those are getting addressed slowly over time and aren’t really something that airframe to airframe balance should take into account.
