Its 2026, the F-14B not having the AIM-9M is pretty mediocre, at its BR range theres planes that get access to the R-73, PL-8B, AAM-3, and it not having the smokeless motor that AIM-54C used is also stupid, you will find aircraft at its br range with FOX 3’s that will blow you out of existance, R-77, AIM-120, PL-12, etc, Gaijin its not that hard to give it what it used, and please dont make the F-14D a premium ;)
5 Likes
Would the smokeless motor really matter anyways besides SIM?
agree.
Not massively, but the huge bloom of smoke trails dose attract attention. And you are (or should be) firing them from well out side of detection range, so it’s not like you should have you position given away by your name tag at that point.
2 Likes
IRIAF at 13.3 with AIM-9Ps for some reason
4 Likes
you poor soul
I also have no idea how on earth the B model still doesn’t have the AIM-9M, only the L. The AIM-9L was standard equipment on slightly later versions of the F-14A; the lack of an AIM-9M on the F-14B is like the lack of an R-73 on the Su-27. Can you imagine an Su-27 with an R-60M instead of an R-73?.. :F
And when will the AIM-54C finally get a Pulse-Doppler seeker? Supposedly, realism is important to Gaijin…
In short, the F-14A should get the AIM-9L because that’s what it used in reality, while the F-14B should get the AIM-9M because it also used those—hello? Gaijin, wake up! ;)
PS:
What’s more, these planes need a buff because they’ve fallen far behind, and this is the simplest way to do it—as long as the right Fox 2s are added so they don’t suddenly become overpowered. They’ll start to keep up with the others, nothing more; they’ll still be challenging to fly, and not everyone will be able to handle them.
PS II:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/ludaFAmzJOwi
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/jM9ehnxndf2V
Maybe someone will take a look at it in 2030.
I don’t think you guys have figured out how Warthunder works yet. This is a tasteful, realistic game not a hyper-realistic one.
Keep in mind that this logic is complicated, because even though the AIM-9M was standard on the F-14A, that doesn’t mean it makes sense for the plane to have the AIM-9M in the game.
War Thunder’s “realistic battles” are essentially arcade-style; any realism is only present in simulation battles, and even then it’s quite limited. War Thunder is a far cry from DCS, which can truly be called “realistic,” but that’s a good thing—it’s why War Thunder is so popular. The arcade-style gameplay in War Thunder’s “realistic battles” is much more accessible.
The only things that are “realistic” are the aircraft models and, often, their armament; the game itself, where a keyboard and mouse are all you need, is hardly realistic.
That’s right; if the F-14B belonged to the USSR, it would likely have been equipped with the AIM-9M long ago. The developers aren’t very objective in their work, and their bias against other nations is often evident.
PS:
A clear example of this was the recent destruction of the PL-12, which is the only Fox 3 we can evade in a close encounter by pressing A+S or S+D; even AIM-54s won’t be fooled that easily (assuming they manage to reach us).
Can you imagine such changes for the R-77? Unthinkable—if it weren’t for the MICA-EM’s vector thrust, it would probably have taken a beating too, just as the AIM-120 was nerfed back in the day.
“realistic"
Nah, they just forgot about the F-14 A and B, they used to be the best planes in the game a while back.
Are a few isolated examples taken out of context supposed to discredit DCS as a realistic game and make it seem less realistic than War Thunder? Picking out exceptions and presenting them as the norm is a favorite strategy of manipulators. Good luck in DCS with just a keyboard and mouse—you won’t even be able to take off from the airport without training on the aircraft manual, while in War Thunder, even a complete novice can fly their first battles. There’s no comparison: War Thunder is an arcade game with realistic elements, DCS—truly realistic gameplay, a simulator.
The game is changing; right now, Tomcats are falling behind and are no longer considered anything special. I still enjoy flying them (Fenixes fired at ~1.4–1.5 Mach can still hit their targets), but they’re no match for the more powerful fighters.
No, they’re both simply bad. One claims not to be a simulator, whilst the other calls itself a simulator but is really just a simulator flavour
Of course not, DCS is a different kind of Warthunder. It just has animated buttons and is in first-person. Have a look at games like Falcon BMS and then tell me what you think.
We know, but Gaijin is a small indie company and can’t afford to fix two fighters
1 Like
in BMS their “MiG-25PD” uses a MiG-25RB model and also carries the wrong missiles on the wrong pylons so BMS is unrealistic as well
Well . . . BMS is an F-16 simulator.
and is DCS a MiG-31 GAU-8 damage model simulator?
you can bring up the most irrelevant examples from DCS AI planes bugs but I can’t do the same for BMS?
You can’t compare DCS and War Thunder
DCS is sold as a complete simulator, yet it fails at the basics, your point is that a pylon is wrong, mine is that the damage models are wrong want to compare? I don’t understand the fanaticism surrounding DCS being a simulation game
" Realism " I’ll say it again, I’m not comparing them. They’re both absolutely terrible.
Why was i reacted with this?
“You can’t compare DCS and War Thunder”
