Recent major update forgot about early gen 4 jets, while recent BR decompression has introduced some questionable changes across the board. Here’s how it can be corrected.
It’s a general idea of how it should look like. I didn’t include every plane, only the most popular ones and the ones that help visualize what features increase a BR, but hopefully this sample is large enough for everyone to get the idea.
I mostly left out attackers, but a lot of them should have a significantly higher BR. A-10 should be somewhere next to the F-14 or F-16, Su-25 somewhere next to the MiG-23MLD or MiG-29 and so on.
A new BR bracket where 12.3 is on top would be very welcome.
Proposed changes (chosen aircraft):
Gen 2 and 3
Aircraft changes:
Spoiler
MiG-21S:
add a tech tree variant - important
BR changes
Spoiler
F-100D ------------------ 9.7 — 9.7
MiG-19PT -------------- 9.7 — 9.7
F-3H-2 Demon ------- 9.3 — 9.3
MiG-21F-13 ----------- 9.7 → 10.0
F-104A/C -------------- 9.7 → 10.0
Lightning F.6 --------- 9.7 → 10.0
F-8E(FN) --------------- 10.0 → 10.3
MiG-21S ---------------- 10.0 → 10.3 important - add a tech tree variant
F-4C ---------------------- 10.7 → 10.3
Mirage 3C ------------- 10.3 — 10.3
F-8U2 -------------------- 10.3 → 10.7
F-8E ---------------------- 10.3 → 10.7
F-104G (Chinese) - 10.3 → 10.7
F-104G (German) - 10.7 — 10.7
F-5A/C ------------------ 10.7 → 11.0
Mirage 3E ------------- 11.0 — 11.0
MiG-21SMT ---------- 11.0 — 11.0
MiG-21MF ------------ 11.0 — 11.0
F-4E ---------------------- 11.0 — 11.0
Phantom FGR.2 ---- 11.3 — 11.3
F-5E ---------------------- 11.3 — 11.3
MiG-21bis ------------- 11.3 — 11.3
J-7E/D ------------------ 11.0 → 11.7
F-104S.ASA ---------- 11.7 — 11.7
MiG-23M -------------- 11.3 → 11.7
MiG-23MLD ---------- 11.7 → 12.0
Mirage F1C ----------- 11.7 → 12.0
F-4J ---------------------- 12.0 — 12.0
J-8B ---------------------- 11.3 → 12.0
F-4EJ Kai -------------- 12.3 — 12.3
Tornado F.3 ---------- 12.0 → 12.3
MiG-21 Bison ------- 12.3 — 12.3
Gen 4
with exceptions
Aircraft changes:
Spoiler
All MiG-29s and Su-27s:
fix flight models
add R-73 (to all)
remove R-27ER/ET from the ones that don’t have R-77s
Yak-141:
add R-73
remove R-27ER/ET
R-27s rework:
Spoiler
I was investigating R-27Rs performance and I found a few inaccuracies, but first let’s present how R-27s are currently modeled in the game.
Specific power = thrust (kgf) * burn time (s) / weight of the missile (kg)
1 kgf = 9.80665 N
R-27R:
Drag coefficient: 1.9
Mass: 253kg
Booster thrust / burn time: 25 125 N / 6s
Specific power: 60.76s
Top speed: 3.5 mach
R-27ER:
Drag coefficient: 1.455
Mass: 350kg
Booster thrust / burn time: 55 275 N / 3.2s (used to be 73 600 N / 2s)
Sustainer thrust / burn time: 26 630 N / 4.8s (used to be 25 600 N / 7s)
Specific power: 88.77s (used to be 95.1s)
Top speed: 5.8 mach
The top speed of R-27R should be 4.5 mach, not 3.5 mach. Also the specific power should be slightly higher at 62s, which is slightly lower than R-24Rs at 63. I don’t know how the R-27R could reach 4.5 mach and have more range with lower specific power than R-24R. Maybe my sources are inaccurate or maybe the booster should be more optimally balanced. It could have more thrust with less burn time, keeping the specific power the same. Maybe the R-27R behaves exactly as it should.
The specific power of R-27ER should be 94s and drag coefficient should be slightly higher than R-27R, definitely not practically the same as the AIM-120 (1.425). It has slightly enlarged fins, has slightly larger caliber and is longer than R-27R, meaning more drag. According to some sources it’s top speed should also be 4.5 mach, but math doesn’t check out, it’s probably just poor sources. The rocket motor is simply too strong and accelerates the missile to around 5.3 mach. The old stats for the booster and sustainer were closer to reality.
I don’t know what the drag coefficient should be on both missiles, but I know that it should be lower than AIM-7M’s (2.3), which it is.
Here’s how I would change them:
R-27R:
Drag coefficient: 1.9
Mass: 253kg
Booster thrust / burn time: 25 638 N / 6s or 34 184 N / 4.5s
Specific power: 62s
Top speed: 4.5 mach
R-27ER:
Drag coefficient: 1.925
Mass: 354kg
Booster thrust / burn time: 68 000 N / 2s
Sustainer thrust / burn time: 25 377 N / 7.5s
Specific power: 94s
Top speed: 5.3 mach
Of course the same changes apply to T variants, they only slightly differ in weight.
Unfortunately there is not much data about R-27s, at least I haven’t found much. Please correct me if I have inaccurate data about R-27s.
War Thunder’s data mine (already in the folder with missiles):
add western RWR (I think it had one, correct me if I’m wrong)
F-16A, F-16A ADF, F-14B:
add AIM-9M
JAS39A Gripen:
add RB 99
BR changes:
Spoiler
F-14A ------------------------ 12.3 — 12.3
F-14B ------------------------ 13.0 → 12.7
Mirage 2000C-S5 ------ 12.3 → 12.7
MiG-29 9-13 -------------- 12.7 — 12.7
Yak-141 --------------------- 12.7 — 12.7
F-16A ------------------------ 12.7 — 12.7
F-16A ADF ---------------- 13.0 → 12.7
F-15A ------------------------ 13.0 — 13.0
Su-27 ------------------------ 13.3 → 13.0
J-11 -------------------------- 13.3 → 13.0
J-8F -------------------------- 13.0 → 13.3
Mirage 4000 ------------- 13.0 — 13.0
MiG-29G ------------------- 13.0 — 13.0
JAS39A Gripen --------- 13.0 → 13.7
AV-8B Plus ---------------- 13.0 → 13.7
Tornado F.3 Late ------- 13.3 — 13.3
Sea Harrier FA 2 ------- 13.0 → 13.3
F-4F KWS LV (ICE) ---- 13.3 — 13.3
MiG-29SMT -------------- 13.3 → 13.7
Su-27SM ------------------ 13.7 — 13.7
J-11A ------------------------ 13.7 — 13.7
F-16C ------------------------ 13.7 — 13.7
F-15C ------------------------ 13.7 — 13.7
Mirage 2000-5F -------- 13.7 — 13.7
F-16AM --------------------- 13.7 — 13.7
JAS39C Gripen --------- 13.7 — 13.7
Attackers
a few examples
BR changes:
Spoiler
A-4B ----------------- 9.0 → 10.0
AV-8A/C ----------- 9.7 → 11.3
Su-25 --------------- 10.7 → 12.3
A-10A -------------- 10.7 → 12.3
Su-25T-------------- 11.7 → 13.0
AMX Ghibli ------- 10.7 → 12.7
Su-25SM3 -------- 12.7 → 13.7
AV-8B Plus ------- 13.0 → 13.7
In general I wanted the gameplay to be asymmetrical. If one plane is better at one thing, the other plane is better at the other thing. Ideally BRs should be decompressed further, but I wanted to keep these changes more realistic. I doubt Gaijin would increase the max BR again after such a short time. I made some compromises here and there.
Mirage 3C gets no IR missiles at 10.0 and F-8E(FN) gets only 530Es or AIM-9Bs at 10.0???
Troll post
Edit: They’re literally the defining features of those aircraft and a cornerstone missile for the French Air Force this is beyond stupid.
Edit 2: yeah just realized Mirage gets 9Bs and 530E too hurr durr I wanted to write this fast. Still, this is outrageous and you cannot just erase one of the most important missiles in the French tech tree.
Magic 1 is a 1975 missile, it has 35G pull. It’s simply too strong at 10.3 where I put F-4C and MiG-21S. Both of these planes and the Mirage 3C itself have no flares.
I don’t know how good R530 is, but I bet it’s as bad as AIM-7D. Paradoxically Russian R-3R is the best radar missile at that BR I think. I’ve been really enjoying it on a MiG-21S.
The idea of 10.3 in this context is that it’s a BR where first radar missiles appear and the missiles have around 10G pull, so that you can dodge them kinetically without giving away too much position. That’s why American F-8s are 10.7, they have 18G missiles and countermeasures.
Both Mirage 3C and F-8E(FN) are better dogfighters than MiG-21s and F-4C. I wish they had AIM-9Es, the difference between AIM-9B and AIM-9E is huge.
That’s why I left the Magic 1 on Mirage 3E.
If Magic 1 is not as strong as I think, please tell me. I remember that A-5C is OP because of that missile.
Not the case, everything is about trade offs, it is very fast and maneuverable yes, but it trades that for not being able to hit long distance shots. Max of 2.5km if the target is flying in a straight line at high alt. The AIM-9P is a better all around missile.
While I appreciate the respect and time you put into these posts simply removing very important missiles is not the solution. They have been fine for years now and will continue to be at this BR.
That’s ahistorical (not that gaijin cares) but would make both of them sit around 9.7 because it is a much worse missile than the Magic 1. This makes another F-5C moment where 8.7s get bullied by (barely) supersonic jets that out-dogfight them in every aspect
I mean, there’s no comparison between Magic 1 and AIM-9B/E or R-3S/R
I’m not very experienced at these BRs, I rushed past them to get to F-15s, F-16s etc as stuff like A-10, Su-25 and A-5C made this BR miserable in air RB and only recently I started grinding in MiG-21S in sim. If that’s the case, then they can keep them. However I can’t see how a MiG-21 without flares can survive a Magic 1 launch from 2km behind him. Even F-104 can’t outpull that with it’s amazing energy retention.
You still have Mirage 3E with a Magic 1. I don’t know how much of a difference there is between them, but they look almost identical.
I looked at the dates here. I didn’t want it to have lower BR than F-100.
F-104A is a very strong plane with big limitations - no countermeasures, bad missiles and hard to aim/brick. F-104G (German) has 4 AIM-9Js and countermeasures, removing the killing power and survivability limitations.
It could, but it’s radar has only HDN modes and overall it’s an older airframe than F-15 and much older than Su-27.
That’s why French planes, traditionally not the best (hence why they’re a minor nation) are important to keep an eye out for at that BR, don’t let them get too close and you’ll be good. You can out accelerate the Mirage 3C and F-8E(FN) in a MiG-21
The Mirage 3E is better in almost every way, maneuverability, engine, energy retention. All of it.
Are their flight models that bad? AIM-9E is a good missile, mainly because it’s uncaged. I would put F-4C at 10.3 even if it had no AIM-7Ds, most of the times they are useless anyway, they have a lot of dead time before they start maneuvering.
From what I know F-8 is an amazing dogfighter with good guns, I don’t know how about Mirage 3C. MiG-21S has the worst gun I’ve ever used in a plane, making it reliant on R-3Rs (which are uncaged like AIM-9Es).
But Magic 1 at a BR without flares is pushing it, 10.7 is the lowest I would put it, where stuff with flares appears.
You can’t out accelerate a missile though. A 2km area of dead zone in front of a plane is a big deal.
Doesn’t Mirage 3C pull more AOA and/or have better turn rate? I know F-8 has better turn rate for sure.
Good for the French then, I bet it’s very competitive vs MiG-21SMT.
That’s a Mirage 3E counterpart. R-60s are also way too strong for something like an F-4C. We already have a MiG-21SMT and MiG-21MF in the game.
I also wanted to keep the changes to a minimum, using what we already have in the game, so that Gaijin maybe actually implements them.
No they’re pretty competitive, the F-8E(FN) can pull some crazy stuff, like 12gs consistently without wing rip, but they don’t have flares so are very reliant on missiles. The AIM-9E is still 10gs so easy to dodge even if not paying attention.
Neither the F-8E(FN) or Mirage 3C flares, making them even more heavily reliant of the Magic 1s when compared to 20g ish missiles on other aircraft with flares (can also only carry 2 Magics)
At 2KM they’re dodgeable kinematically by hard turns. Once the burner runs out (very quick) they’re essentially dead in the air.
Overall it’s a good proposal, but the Magics need to stay, having an uncompetitive tier 7 would be sad :( they’re balanced enough as of right now.
I guess it can stay at 9.3. I just wanted to keep it somewhat chronological.
F-104G (Chinese) is too strong at 10.3 with AIM-9Js, but it doesn’t have flares like F-104G (German). I wanted to make a distinction here, that one has flares and the other doesn’t, but F-104G (German) can be a 10.7 too. F-104 can take on even 20G missiles without flares.
It would pollute 13.0 with AMRAAMs. I wanted early gen 4s to never even see Fox 3s. It could be 13.0, since it has poor ground ordnance for the BR, nothing guided, but that’s the same thing as A-10 and Su-25 at 10.7. It’s better for a bad plane to be bad (but playable), than for a bad plane to make good planes worse. It’s the same story as with F-4F Ice, Tornados etc.
Having no flares doesn’t make a plane reliant on missile. Having a bad gun with low velocity and/or being a brick make you reliant on missiles.
F-104 has an amazing gun, but it’s such a brick that it’s hard for you to get your gun on target, that’s why having AIM-9Js on F-104 is such a huge upgrade.
MiG-21S on the other hand has good AOA, making it easy to get your guns on target, but shooting with the GSz-23L is like pissing against the wing.
F-100 has good AOA and good guns, making it very fun in dogfights, because it has good missiles, but it doesn’t need them.
None of the 10.3 planes in my proposal have 20G missiles or flares. Having either of them makes the plane automatically a 10.7 at least.
I’m glad you like it. If they aren’t as scary as I thought, then they can stay. I noticed Mirage 3C has no RWR, making it susceptible to R-3Rs, so that could balance it out.
Overall some tweaking is needed (pls gaijoobles give 15.0). Also the F-8E(FN) has about 1 second of firing time before the guns completely jam, and are super unreliable over 1g irl (not modeled in game)
Most French Aircraft around that BR don’t have an RWR, the French decided they were homeland defense and fleet defense in the F-8E(FN)s case so didn’t need to have an RWR.
