also important to note is that Aim 120s are the worst ARH missiles at top tier, with poor close range performance and comparable long range performance to others
2 Likes
honestly AMBER is more realistic than the dual pylons gaijin gave the EFT on dev
4 Likes
nothing fictional about 8 ARH being possible on the eurofighter, just impossible to prove without receiving a permanent ban
there is no examples of the double pylons that they added, there isnt even a mockup of them or any reason to believe they are functional
3 Likes
It’s a fictional method to reach a real count, kind of like the Su-27SM being made into the SM3 in a round about ahistorical way
Yapping alert. TLDR: It's over boys, they're not adding anything else to the GE trash due to sweats.
First up, Startshark released new stats, showing interesting trends about November. One of which is the F-15C GE performance on its first half month of performance.
Some disingenuous individuals may say: “But Pyro, that’s some good numbers, the plane’s good.” And they might have a point, but first, check out the F/A-18C Late’s release performance back in March.
That’s triple the amount of games on release for a tenth of a difference in Kills per Death. It’s obvious there was more people playing the F/A-18C Late (obviously due to sheer novelty factor back in the day), including less skilled players than on the F-15C Golden Eagle that, apparently, has found a niche of skilled players, albeit lots of people underperform in it as far as the data I have gathered throughout this last three weeks.
A feasible counterargument may be: “B-but the Golden Eagle had less days to be played, that’s why it had less games played, right?”
Plain wrong. The Hornet was released with Hornet’s sting on March 18th, 2025., while the Golden Eagle was released on November 11th, 2025, having effectively more days during its respective month to be played by the playerbase.
In conclusion, the plane is cooked by stat farming (overepresenting good performance) and sweats. Its time to wait for the AESA F-15E or the F-15EX.
The F-15C Golden Eagle is officially done.
1 Like
Dunno what you are trying to prove here, that the GE is as good as the very meh F/A-18C late?
The latter is well known to be quite subpar, if the GE is preforming as well as it, then that would be verifiable proof that the GE needs help.
Oh who am I kidding, a US vehicle underperforming has never given gaijin a reason to do anything but put a minor Band-Aid on the issue like with the M1s.
I’m proving that the plane is meeting Gaijin’s numbers to not give anything else to it. The vehicle is getting a frag per death, which is far better than you could ask for the F/A-18C late for example while being 0.3+.
And then they will obviously ignore the fact the plane is being played by a glaring minority of players composed of both good players and basically clueless ones who believed the plane was good because it’s new.
Given the logic I'm applying, the Su-30 should be having at the very least 0.10+ KpD this very november if it had at least a third less played games by inexperienced players.
I have a feeling that’s simply why Gaijin is so apprehensive about giving the F-15CGE its MRML racks. But they have not outright denied it (yet).
We will see in the coming dev updates whether the BRs will be increased and the EFT(A), J-10C, and Rafales get moved up to 14.7.
But even then, imo, the F-15CGE will still be subpar compared to the Su-30SM and EFT(M). The EFT(M) will have both a significantly better FM and more missiles, and the Su-30SM will have significantly more missiles.
1 Like
Oh, please. Have no doubt that all the statistics are effectively the reason.
The most disgusting part is that with all this statistical sham, they’re not even going to fix the F-15C flight model, which would affect the F-15C MSIP II as well.
Anyway.
1 Like
45% wr vs 49% WR though, which is all that matters to them.
then there’s 67% on the rafale, but for some reason the devs just kinda leave it like that (above 60% all year btw), to put that in presetive the aim120 was good for like 3 weeks before it was insta nerfed into the ground cause other nations complained.
8 Likes
Wrong. Gaijin tends to balance vehicles around KpD and resources gathered (SL+RP), not necessarily about winrates since air top tier has mixed battles. It’s not crazy to think they have a standardized KPI that tells them every BR change cycle which vehicles overperform on SL+RP per game and KpDs.
It’s the reason why most of the ground French stuff or the Charioteer are relatively overtiered, and some other vehicles like the M24 or the Pz.IV F2 are criminally undertiered.
1 Like
Issue there is that the Rafale is not a implement of a certain nation.
Stares at TOW-2B being nerfed into the floor god knows how long ago now and nothing has changed on it.
If that was the case the T58 would have gone up by now, however, the T58 has a above average WR and within premium expected SL and RP rates, while having a vastly higher KpD than those around it. It not having a high enough WR and gain rate has allowed it to remain where it is.
KpD has seldom ever been the reason of a vehicle being moved, win rate and resource gain rate however have been formative, and the GE and 18C late both sit well below others at their BR range beyond the 18C late being slightly propped up by some A2G work.
Did it actually get specific nerfs? (was a while ago now) I just took its decline as people learning how to turn.
oh yeah it got nerfed pretty hard soon after it came out lost a big chunk of turning and got a slight nerf in range.
4 Likes
Here are my notes from the major Fox-3 rebalance they did a while back
- the PL-12 got less drag (1.75 → 1.6), slightly better fin AoA, better lofting
- the MICA-EM got less drag (1.85 → 1.65), slightly better fin AoA, nothing on lofting changes
- the Derby/R-Darter got less drag (2.3 → 1.9), better fin AoA, better lofting
- the AAM-4 is still gimped afaik, it got worse fin AoA, better lofting, idk if anything else is really a buff/nerf so it’s worth checking out
- the R-77 got less drag (1.85 → 1.45), better fin AoA, and better lofting
- the AMRAAM got slightly more drag (1.4 → 1.425), less fin AoA, but it got better lofting and slightly better motor performance
For reference, here’s how utterly wrecked the AMRAAM’s fin AOA was:
More drag, less wing area, far worse fin AOA actuation values. The max fin AOA got slightly better, but that doesnt make up for how bad the multipliers became. The motor and lofting changes were negligible.
3 Likes
Fair enough, thank you both.
And there are plenty of accepted reports too that never got looked at.
Yep.
Also of course we cannot use datamined values to bug report things. So there’s no way we can say the AMRAAM’s fin AOA actuation is wrong in game. Although I have seen live fire test data shown in bug reports, which have been ignored like you said.
At the same time there’s literally zero chance Gaijin has sources on the AMRAAM’s fin actuation speed or its servos being worse than its contemporaries. That’s wildly classified of course, and very clearly a balancing decision.
I can understand why the AMRAAM pulls worse than the AAM-4 and PL-12, for example (similar design profiles). But they should at least be in the same ballpark as they were before the AMRAAM’s nerf. Now the AMRAAM is just the absolute, bar none, worst Fox-3 at close range.
Best we can hope for is this report someday gets looked at:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/2KiennatgLHF
These would help too
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/QhYDPYj3LIRl
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/Bdn69n0zp3Ib
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/i0HIOTuiT0kl
1 Like