Go check thunderskill.
The fact that you guys think the F-5C should go to the same BR as the G.91YS is insane to me.
1 Like
That doesn’t make any sense. Your gonna get a lot of cases of reports going though with people not being able to view evidence.
1 Like
Its to allow users to submit stuff that is their own personal copies of books and documents they may have paid lots of money for or don’t want to share with everyone.
It’s up to the user submitting if they want to share it.
Thunderskill is less than 5% of the playerbase. It does not accurately represent anything.
You are the only one here that suggested G91YS & F-5E should be the same BR BTW, no one else did.
What? There is a post in this thread saying the F-5C should go down in BR to 9.7? Are you not reading anything in here.
Until we have another way to measure stats, thunderskill is our only way. But hey, just go play at 10.3 and tell me how many matches you win as the US vs how many you lose to them.
1 Like
It does, though. Its just that as its not a random distribution, or a census which limits the kinds of claims that the data actually supports, and the accuracy of said claims.
its like for example claiming that based on a random sample of players that have stats for both from in the database if the BVM has a higher winrate than the M1 AIM. Sure there would be a lot of qualifiers to any such claim, but there would be no reason to doubt that due to knowing that the goal of the Matchmaker is a global 50% winrate so the actual difference is likely somewhat distorted in comparison to the true values, that doesn’t make the statement false, only that a concrete scale to which it is wrong questionable and difficult to assert with any degree of confidence.
1 Like
Thunderskill is less than 5% of the playerbase, and is among the best players in the game with exceptions.
There is no accuracy.
k so while we are at it remove flares from most of the russian planes and chinese planes since they didn’t have them either and chinese flares were prone to failing at high speed
2 Likes
If AAM was removed from the game then, yes it should gone.
I play a lot in that BR and I don’t really see bots.
What? Do you mean if all AAMs were removed then we could remove the flares from the F-5C?
Are we playing the same game ? The Yak-141 had those things when served in the VVS ? XD
BTW, I thought the F-5C was bad for SB, because 90% of them were easy targets on my Mig21, now that I got it, I realize how bad most of F-5C pilots are …
Yes.
Even implementing Supersonic jets/prem jet and AAM was big mistake ever in the game.
1 Like
So let’s remove the Yak141 entirely aswell, then. Never saw a completed prototype nor did it ever see service.
What’s that? Then we have to remove everything in the same boat? Fine with me.
The F-5C is 9.7 material because it’s barely supersonic, 2 9Es and guns that are inconsistent on damage. We can argue about the tanky DM and I agree that it needs revision, but will add from personal experience that everytime I ate a missile that didn’t outright kill me I was mobility killed regardless through dead engines, loss of wings or dead controls.
Additionally, keep in mind that we have Harriers at 9.7 that carry 2-3x as many flares aswell as 9Gs and while they may be incapable of turnfighting they have higher thrust and acceleration and are able to outclimb the initial merge and then dive down on others.
The F-5C is a tad over BR’d and is a one trick pony for dogfighting at a BR where BVR becomes the main theme of fighting, and when it’s uptiered to 11.0-11.3 all it becomes is an easy kill for SARHs. Now, I’m not saying it should fight subsonics - No, I want serious decompression, hard caps for in BRs and an end to +/- 1.0 MM algorithm.
1 Like
Sure let’s just scam ten thousands of people who bought it you knucklehead
1 Like
Well, we got em. So do you think all aircraft should get flares then?
1 Like
They did it to the Italian M60.
4 Likes
The F-5C is absolutely not 9.7 material.
What is up with US mains thinking this plane is garbage?
2 Likes