And this makes it special… how, exactly? It’s not like any of the other 11.0s have a good missile kit stock. It’s not even the worst of them.
The MiG-21 Bis is stuck with R-3Ss (Slightly worse AIM-9Bs) until tier 3.
The Mirage III E is stuck with AIM-9Bs until tier 4.
Same with the F-8E.
Stock grinds universally suck for missile tier jets. That’s not an excuse to move them down. Especially on a plane like the F-5E, which is such a strong dogfighter that not having it’s missiles doesn’t hurt it anywhere near as badly as an F-4 or F-104.
That’s a strange selection of opponents. Personally, I would have thrown in a MiG-21 Bis (even though I’d expect it to lose), since that’s the other 11.0 dogfighting focused jet.
What we mean is
He(Pangolin, who talked about F-5E equipped with AIM-9E) is wrong.
And He (not U) prob wants to send them lower, bc he genuinely believes that every F-5 variants are awful
So, even though your claim is technically right
(bc USAF version of F-5E can also be equipped AIM-9E and she need to unlock 9J on mod4)
Bringing stock modification of F-5E is not a good move
As we explained earlier.
Swiss one as well, albeit with whatever designations they gave their 9E’s and J’s.
My point is that brining stock weapons isn’t a choice, so until you have the upgrades you’re boned.
With all that said I’ve also gunned more than a few MiG-25’s with the F-5E, but that says more about the brainlets in the MiG’s than it does about the F-5.
Bringing stock weapon in a match is one thing, bringing stock weapon into the discussion is another.
and in discussion, stock weapon should be excluded as a factor unless we need to discuss about stock
And about how bad stock modification of F-5E, prob Gaijin should buff every stock loadout of rank 7
It isn’t only problem of F-5,
For Example stock F-4J(Rank 7) against F-16A is also nonsense.
Especially when we think about the ROCAF F-5E (License-built one), it has the AIM-9P as stock missiles.
Anyway, discussing the stock modification of F-5E further seems off-topic derailment so can we stop discussing that further, shall we?
That is the point.
Pangolin says he gunned F-5 down even though he is a bad pilot, then every other pilot who struggles against F-5 are brainlets, and he keep underselling F-5 variants.
I still remember that he said Harriers are better dogfighters than F-5 before :rofl:
Anyway, back to original topic,
what do you think about F-5C(USAF) and F-5A(Thai/Japan), and their weaponry?
OP wants to choose either 'give AIM-9J/P to make them equivalent to F-5A(ROCAF), or ‘buff them down to 10.3’.
Any thoughts?
Tl;Dw: The R3S has a couple of minor differences, but the main one is that it’s seeker is less sensitive, meaning you need to get even closer to the enemy to get a lock.
It’s also very slightly heavier with a very slightly worse delta V, not that you’re likely to notice this in game.
Don’t actually have either of them personally, I’d quite like to see the F-5C moved down but on the strict condition that it lose its fantasy mods, i.e. no a-a missiles at all and no CM’s either.
For the Thai F-5A, I believe it’s represented more or less accurately, don’t really see to much of an issue leaving it as is. End of the day the F-5A was never supposed to be a particularly dominant fighter, it was meant to be cheap and cheerful with a broad but also limited range of capabilities, i.e. jack of all master of none… at 10.7 in WT it kinda is.
this video is from before when the 9B’s proxy delay was nerfed.
now 9B has 2.2s proxy delay and R-3S has 0.5s.
this mean if you fire at like 1km the 9B will fly by the target and not detonate meanwhile R-3S does and kills the target.
That is an issue, but I can’t really imagine firing an AIM-9B that close anyways. The whole point of missiles in general is to get kills without commiting to getting a guns solution on someone, and if you’re that close and within the range that an AIM-9B would actually pull hard enough to get the kill, you’re surely also in gun range, no?
Been a while since I’ve used AIM-9Bs, however, so I could be mistaken.
