F-5C Flares need to be removed. It is FICTIONAL

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.

3 Likes

The F-5C is absolutely not 9.7 material.

What is up with US mains thinking this plane is garbage?

2 Likes

This would be a interesting way to use flares but any flares is better then none

Did you even read my post? This response from you tells me you didn’t actually read it.

What am I meant to get out of it?

You’re saying the F-5C is overtiered? Why because the harrier and av-8s are undertiered? You want decompression but want the F-5C at 9.7?

The US is dominating in air rb between 9.3-10.7, how you want buffs for them…I just can’t understand it.

To quote directly from my original comment; 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.

Also, where do you see US dominating between 9.3-10.7? Because I NEVER see US on a winning spree in that BR range no matter whether I’m fighting as/with or against them. The novelty of the Warthogs and Intruders has well worn off and anyone with some basic knowledge of those aircraft and can rub 3 braincells together can generally deal with them without too much hassle. Hell, I countered them in the pos that is the Harrier GR. 1 - While it was sitting at 10.0 itself.

Just play the game, the side with more US players is winning everytime.

How is a nimble fighter that wins every dog fight not a good trait? It also sips fuel. You can climb to 8000 meters with after burners and still only burn 4 mins worth of fuel.

It’s a BR where the US has the best BVR also. The US also has the most jets with countermeasures in that BR range.

Edit: just had a match at that BR. I was in a F-5A and it was just me and a F-5C team mate vs 4 or 5 and we came back and won the match. I spent most of the match doing nothing and we still won(though I did have 2 kills stolen)

I never launched a flare.

1 Like

I do play the game, and while I don’t often play in the 9.7-10.7 area, when I do I don’t see US teams racking up considerable wins. Also, I don’t see F-5Cs winning every single dogfight they engage in - If that was legitimately the case then I’d take it into consideration but this statement of yours is entirely hyperbolic. And best BVR? Sparrows and Skyflashes having longer range than R3Rs means nothing if the radar fails to acquire targets - Which is near impossible to do below 5,000 feet because that’s where most of the fighting is and nobody has Pulse-Doppler - So it’s an inapplicable argument in most circumstances. Also, need I remind you that the F-5C has no BVR capabilities?

As for most the most CM-equipped aircraft that only counts if you include premiums which big surprise - most of the ones with CMs are premiums in that BR range, and that also applies for some other nations, so it’s a moot point.

At this point you’re not making any convincing arguments you’re just complaining with hyperbolic statements and moot points. What’s next at this point? Strawmen?

F-5s are dominating. At typical Air RB PvP altitudes they’re faster than alot so-called Mach 2 jets. Lose not that much speed while turning. Never break wings off and often tank 1-2 missiles until they go down. Its a bit strange, that it even competes with my Tornado IDS 11.3, which is supposed super fast by the community. Its always funny when you pass a F-5 with full speed around 1200 kmh, then it makes a 180 deg turn and stick on you six without falling back, without losing energy you’d imagine when you completly change direction by 180 deg.

So lets just conlude.

  • op Gatling with more range/damage/ammo than other competitors - check
  • better ground loadout (Mavericks) than most Strike jets, even from higher BRs - check
  • op damage model, almost no burn damage, just gets hit and keeps going - check
  • extreme maneuverabilty, truly wins EVERY turnfight - check
  • strangely op speed at relevant, usually low altitudes in Air RB - check
  • nimble and good amount of historically incorrect countermeasures makes it hard to hit - check
  • its harder to get IR locks in comparision to other jets - check.
  • teams are usually packed with F-5’s which least to nice winrates - check

Why do these things even need their ahistorical CM dispensers? Would still be op without, since they’re able to pull away from even R-60’s when piloted right.

If you face them you often can’t run, can’t outturn and can’t hit them. Its really meh.

PS: Isn’t it somehow wrong that this small lightweight thing has such a hyper durable wing/fuselage structure and is able to tank even heavy hits?

5 Likes