Yea but it will always be facing Rafale, which is by far the best jet in the game at the moment. that does not really matter when its in uptier purgatory against the most overperforming jet of the game
(me just pointing this out will be enough evidence for another Rafale buff)
Can we please get the devs to reconsider the Python 4 at the very least? Python 3 does not cut it as it does not have IRCCM compared to other missiles at the BR like AIM-9M, AIM-9Li(/1), Magic 2, R-73, PL-5EII and PL-8B. The fact that the game team thinks that the Python 3 is equivalent to ANY of those is kinda crazy.
There’s absolutely nothing that holds a candle to the Rafale because of how crushingly dominant it is in the turn-in, shoot, turn-out meta we have currently. I don’t even expect potential additions like the F-15EX and Su-35S in December to hold a candle to it as these airframes retain the poor flight performance their current closest peers have (F-15E, Su-30SM) and only really go fast in a straight line. The MICA paired with a 14G airframe that has energy only beaten by the Eurofighter will inevitably dominate in ARB until finally nerfed.
We have already explained many times that the seeker irccm can be changed and toned down
Also 20 km range it the max possible range
Effective range will be in-between 8-10 km in good launch conditions because of how much drag the missile has even though it can achieve a speed of mach 3.5
With the rafale and eft at 14.3 the f16i is literally out matched in every singular aspect
The seeker IRCCM doesn’t even have to be toned down from the current implementation in the blk. It’s essentially a marginally better AIM-9M IRCCM and gets flared the same way by flaring while snap-rolling (flowering). You can test this yourself in a custom mission and you will quickly see that it’s pretty easy to flare and goes for flares the same way the AIM-9M does with the right technique.
Yeah, the slight FOV clamping is made redundant/largely overwritten by the seeker shutoff in-game. Only way to have both work properly in one missile would be to add additional parameters to configure it so that the missile relies on seeker shutoff at long distances but switches to FOV clamping only at short range or something along those lines. Seeker shutoff makes it get fooled instantly by flowering even with the FOV clamp also in effect.
FOV clamping does not have a noticeable effect when paired with seeker shutoff until the clamping is made really, really narrow, in which case clamping alone would make the missile very hard to flare anyway.
Do you know how IRCCM is implemented in-game? There are two types, shutoff and FOV clamping. The PL-5EII also has a two colour dual-band seeker but is implemented in-game with FOV only IRCCM just fine.
No, those two have extremely narrow FOV clamps that make them very very difficult to flare regardless. The Python 4 in the files has a very wide FOV clamp, considerably wider than the R-73/Magic 2 and thus is flared the same way the 9M is flared due to the only effective IRCCM type being seeker shutoff.
its flight performance is far too strong… the Python 4 has a range of 20km, can pull >50g, has a 90 degree of-bore-sight angle, and can turn a full 180 to destroy a target behind the launching aircraft at speed.
The Python 4 does not have a kinematic range of 20 km in the game. 50G pull is irrelevant as many top tier missiles match its turning performance like the MICA, Magic-2, R-73 etc.
You cannot launch IR missiles at targets behind you in-game so this is also irrelevant.