Both of those are incorrect, the Ra’am itself already has 3 bug reports on it.
That “different color” is because they’re fundamentally different and one of the many major changes between the -220 and -229.
Gaijin simply doesn’t want to retexture them, and instead have copy/pasted prior models.
Yeah, -229 derivatives are rate monsters. Impossible to slow down if they’re pushing some speed, though.
IMO it’s better for the 16i to lose its 120c5, gain derbies and go to 13.7
throw in the Python3 instead of the 9L and I’m totally with you
Would make it ahistorical and a downgrade to both F-16 block 40s in game already, No
It would still get 120a/bs, you can choose between them and the ferby. Plus it’s still an upgrade to the other d due to maws and engine
Like it is right now? lol
Missing 120B, derby ER, python4-5 so much for the ahistorical, also the F16C blk40 is already better since you can choose if you wanna run Derbys alongside 120s
This brings literally everything to the table, the best F-16 for both BVR and CAS in game, while being a better rate fighter than it’s brethren due to increased thrust, and a final point is the incredible israeli defensive suite, making it far more suited to top tier than any other F-16 in game
Well if I had a choice it would have all available weaponry, but i refuse to ‘downgrade’ the brand new jet to fit a lower BR, defeats the point of adding the Sufa in the first place
well as it currently stands you have a downgrade to the C at 0.3 higher BR
? Thats both false and obtuse
Sufa will never get Derby/I-Derby ER
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/ft3kTE2MYmpk
for all intends and purposes it is true though, the F16 is meant to be played at close range and the C works better in that regard (120A and Derby), if you want to play BVR, you literally research the F15I in the same line (it’s literally faster and you get 2 more missiles, so i don’t really get the point of it as it currently stands
No the c for close range js worse, derby and 120a is better for close range
So it’s a bad jet because it doesn’t fit your playstyle, well that’s that, no one is forcing you to play the F-16I, but we will certainly oppose the artificial nerfing of it in order to cater to certain players who misuse the aircraft
never said that, I also fail to see how adding the Python3 instead of the 9L and the Derby and 120Bs for the sake of diversity is considered a “nerf” in your eyes, I also honestly don’t care about the “ahistorical” debate gaijin has proven that weaponry can and will be used as balancing/marketing tool (see most of the Hornets in game)
never ask an F-16I player why they feel entitled to get the potentially best fox2 in WT when they already have the same AIM-9M as most other nations (the fact that they’re willing to carry PY4 instead of 120 in a fox3 meta already says a lot about the PY4’s OPness)
I’m proposing all weaponry added, and if you pay attention, this started because someone proposed the complete removal of top tier AMRAAMs in favour of the weaponry present on the F-16 blk 40s, which would make it functionally identical to preexisting israeli F-16s, so I disagreed with that since it’s a 14.0 jet minimum
Israel did it in the 90s, we can have it now, when fighting russian and french jets from 2014 and 2019
well in that case i totally agree, and wish you a great evening
Not true. Python 3s honestly just work my constantly. I rather be flared than have my missile just go for nothing and turn like the Titanic. And aim120s are the same. 120s just can’t turn. I rather use derbys sense I can still bvr and actually do close range fights and not have to worry my missile won’t be able to turn within an entire state