Get into some test of R-73’s capability in the new 2nd dev server with friends, find out that 1 flare is enough to distract R-73’s guidance, almost as prone to be flared as R-60M. It’s vector thrusting capability is almost nerfed to the ground too as there is a huge delay in turning after launch making the missile both super easy to flare and to dodge.
The original suggestion for Nerfing R-73 is due to the US and other nations lacking similar IR missiles. Now with the addition of Aim-9M and buff of Magic 2, not only 9M is much more flare resistant and invisible with no smoke trail, but even the Magic 2 and Python is much better than R-73 considering it to be only a longer-range R60M which doesn’t make any sense both in historical accuracy and balancing consideration. This will also render Mig-29SMT useless at 12.3. Please consider giving back R-73’s statistic as it was in the first Dev server
Yes, it’s only way of avoiding flare is if the opponent is directly 12oclock and only flare but does not turn at all. It is just way too bad in flare resistance
Gaijin has been repeatedly nerfing IR missiles for a long time, and there was major community backlash that the R-73 and Aim 9M couldn’t be defeated with a single flare press.
Furthermore, they states that the seekers on both of these missiles will be nerfed from their 2nd dev server state on the live server.
Just consider all missiles Aim 9J/R-60 to be the same with some having better pull and range than others, 1 flare will always defeat them unless they fly straight with full burner on in a perfect rear aspect shot.
Well sorry to deceive you @VectorKamarov but python are one flare counterable and Magic 2 IRCCM is exactly the same as the R73 one but the Magic 2 has less pull also IRCCM of Magic 2 which is IRCCM of R73 (which it shouldn’t be because Magic 2 IRCCM is far better than the R73 one) works the same and to achieve a guaranteed kill with a magic you have to shoot your missile at less than 2 km while approaching your target while being in rear aspect. So if you keep getting misses you just launch your missiles in shit config. And don’t come sayin “but i tested that way” IDC there is no video proof. Show proofs, do tests, compare with other missiles and record it and demonstrate to people of this thread if what you claim is actually worth claiming or if you just are biased because you can’t achieve a kill because you think you are playin Point and click Thunder.
Also IRCCM of 9M will be less effective than Magic 2 and R73 one on live serv and it will be done by a buff of R73 IRCCM because actual coding techniques of 9M IRCCM should be applied to R73 and Magic 2 too thats why there won’t be a nerf to AIM9M but a buff to R73 and Magic 2 IRCCM coding and rejection formula.
Well first of all, I feels that gaijin buffed R-73 back a bit on the last day of 2nd dev server. The flare resistance seems to be a bit better than what I tested on the first day and it can turn as well in low speed situations like on 1st dev. For video proof I didn’t record specific test on R-73, but there are some clips in my video on my other thread talking about nerf on both R-27 and R-73. I am posting this based on that other people replying should also have played on dev server and with R-73 so should share similar experience with me. I played R-73 and aim-9m for most of the time and I can be certain for their huge difference in flare resistance in various angles and situations. For Magic 2 I am mostly on the receiving end so that may not be so accurate and I am glad that you can come and point out they have exact same guidance since I know nothing about datamining
So everything you know from data is that AIM9M use a line specified Bandtoreject which mean it can reject flares to some point while R73 and Magic 2 have a seeker FOV reduction after launch which should limit their capacity to see flares as they are ejected quite far the seeker tends to not see them however its only one of the system the Magic 2 and R73 use many other systems R73 use a dual element seeker that allows it to treat and distinguish flazres and sun from flares but flares can still get it but Magic 2 has a 4 element seeker that can seperate flares and other heat sources from a motor heat source even better than the R73 does which would make it the most powerfull missile but usable only at short range but as Gaijin has to maintain a certain level of Russian and US bias it’s highly probable the real Magic 2 IRCCM will never be added while it’s only one of the features that should make this missile insanely capable at close range as the Magic 2 was built to use dual plane maneuverability for its whole flight duration making it able to go up to 50G of maneuverability so sorry if i was quite aggressive in my comment but when i see people asking for upgrades of quite strong missiles while some are just overnerfed it kinda makes me angry.
No worries, I play US/Soviet/Germany/China/Sweden top tiers, I know exactly how biased US/USSR vehicles and weapons are. I dont play japan/Italy/France simply due to the fact that I know how much suffering they will experience. So I am quite glad to see gaijin give python and also buff to Magic 2 (although not as good as irl). I definitely want to see more equal competitors in top tier other than US/USSR, but I am also just getting bored from having to play R-60 type missile repeatedly. I just want R-73 to be a different experience from R-60 and from my experience for the last day of 2nd dev server I would consider it an acceptable capability while not too op.(still weaker than its performance in 1st dev server but i would say balance wise it is fine)
R-73s are unflareable when target is on afterburner.
And their current iteration thrust vectoring is more accurate than their first iteration.
Just cause people are flaring off AB doesn’t mean it has R-60 flare resistance.
On top of that 9L & Python 3 flare resistance against AB targets were also buffed for this major update.
Good to know, some of my tests are based on custom server battles and in my other thread one technician mentioned that prolonged battle do have bugs impacting missile’s guidance, so it could be due to that too.
Glad my message was taken in good light.
I know my messages can sometimes sound too harsh.
I did over 100 missile fire tests on 9L, Python 3, Magic 2 pre & post-IRCCM, R-73, AIM-9M, and one other I forget.
On afterburner out to 4km, and off afterburner down to 0.5km.
I am very grateful to people like you who did in-depth test and comparisons to provide reliable results. My tests are more random and less controlled so I am always open to objections especially with solid data. After all, my opinion won’t stand if my references are not accurate and my ability to test or datamine is very limited.
