This post is only relevant as of the current Dev on March 1st, 2025. Significant changes may have been made which make parts or all of this post obsolete
Hello, I’d thought I start with a small disclaimer for any questions you may have
1: Why did you make this post?
As a reference and collection of thoughts for future discourse with others for everyone on the forum.
2: But XYZ graph said ABC!
Context is always very important, without it paper numbers mean nothing! I’ll go into more detail about this later in the post, so stay tuned.
3: The XYZ missile can’t do the same thing the R-77-1 can!
Yes! But that’s ok, as I’ll explain later the balance won’t be upset by it.
Where to start! The R-77-1 is an advanced version of the base R-77, so I’ll start there. It’s so secret that the R-77 is pretty bad for conventional BVR, but the R-77-1 improves on that pretty nicely. The R-77-1 is faster and has more range, as well as more thrust. This comes with its own set of drawbacks as will be explained later.
Now for the comparison part, many of you have already seen this graph
Now what is this saying? It’s saying that in a vacuum the R-77-1 is marginally better than the AIM-120 at BVR. Here’s the kicker though, that’s limited to paper. The R-77-1 is not better than the AIM-120 in a practical situation. Why though? Because it is a very draggy missile, here’s the comparison to the AIM-120.
So again, what does this mean? It means that in a real world scenario the AIM-120 will be better for BVR. This is because a maneuvering target will make the missile maneuver, causing that massive drag to come into play and significantly slow the R-77-1 down. Airframe performance is also very important to take into consideration, an AMRAAM from Mach 1.8 on an F-15E or Eurofighter will easily beat an R-77-1 from Mach 1.35 on the Su-30SM.
This is why context is always important. Numbers on a graph can seem scary until you put them into a realistic scenario. It’s always important to consult all the facts before formulating your argument.
A lot of people brought this up as well. They think the long and short range performance of the R-77-1 will affect balance significantly. This is not the case though, I’ll start by addressing the question of long range. The R-77-1 will be mostly worse in practical situations than AMRAAMs and likely on par with PL-12s and AAM-4s. So it won’t be very Meta altering in that perspective. Now for the short range performance. 50Gs is quite a lot! But it is important to remember it is not the best in this category either, the MICA beats it pretty easily. The R-77-1 is a Jack of all Trades, a pretty good one at that!
That segues us into the second concern others have, the numbers. 12 R-77-1s is the most ARHs any plane can carry. That’s what defines the playstyle of the Su-30SM, it’s a big missile bus with enough love for everyone. This is not necessarily “OP” as some have claimed. It is very good, but there would be a much larger impact on the Meta if it was for example 12 AIM-120C-5s. The fact that it is 12 of a missile which is not the best at anything is what counteracts the sheer numbers. While 12 may be a little excessive it really won’t be entirely game shifting, just another fold in the match to watch out for!
The R-77-1 will provide an experience of ARH BVR combat for those who missed out with the R-77. Although a powerful missile it really can’t be considered Meta defining. It will definitely be something to keep an eye out for in your matches but nothing that will cause any severe concerns. It should provide some good, fun and competitive combat for all players.
Those are my thoughts at least. I hope everyone can find this to be a pretty agreeable point of view. As a general reminder this is not the place for petty fights over supposed bias and whatnot. So let’s try to keep discourse respectful and informative. Thanks for reading!