F-16AM yes
1 Like
why is this even a complaint or a problem the aim120 slightly better at literally just ONE thing the r77-1 is better in every other way but for some reason if its not the second coming of the r27er and broken in every way players arnt happy.
He isn’t complaining, he’s dispelling the myth that the r-77-1 is always longer ranged than the amraam… you are clearly biased on the subject and commenting out of emotion if you cant tell that
Don’t mind him, he’s still traumatized from 27ER being the best at being almost useless in a match.
what people don’t take into account is you don’t kill a competetive player in bvr, they will notch all of your missiles at that range if they want to and the fight will happen in WVR where the r-77-1 wins. Therefore a competetive player vs competetive player, the r-77-1 takes the cake over the amraam.
You can only kill noobs with 30km launches
3 Likes
you are literally describing the aim120
this entire thread is a bias refusal to admit the r77-1 is better than the aim120 by using the same justification over and over again while ignoring pretty much everything else
1 Like
well if you cant read, aim120 does actually everything better vs 77-1 in game performance
I’m not complaining, trying to bust these false statements that 77-1 is superior on 120 in game, while it’s not.
That Drag and wobble issue makes it even easy to dodge under 20km range, that paper 50g pull feels more like a aprils day fool instead truly pulling 50g.
Hard to admit what is not even true.
Yes R77-1 is ONLY BETTER AGAINST STRAIGHT FLYING TARGETS IF MANAGED TO LAUNCH ON SIMILIAR HEIGHTS AS 120. (and when reaching that altitude and speed you allready have 120’s flying on you)
In everything else, that 3x drag compared to 120 destroys every single thing what would make it actually better or even par in 120.
Can you explain how the r-77-1 is better
No as 120 can still be used effectively in a game.
Back then, 27ER alongside other SARHs was defeated by simply flying relatively close to the ground, it required close to zero effort.
I can’t wrap my head around this.
R-77-7 peak performance range: 1-20 km
MICA peak performance range: 1-15 km
AIM-120 peak performance range: 25-40 km
Typical gameplay engagement ranges:
1-10 km (merging)
10-20 km (1-2 minutes after takeoff)
25-40 km (airfield to airfield and shortly after takeoff, missiles can be dodged by gently turning away).
So HOW is AIM-120’s “superior range” suppossed to give it any sort of advantage?
“R-77-1 and MICA are infinitely superior and practically undodgeable in actual gameplay engagement ranges; but you see, you could supposedly theorically launch AIM-120s from five billion kilometers away that aren’t a thing or practical ingame, that clearly makes it better!”
5 Likes
Wrap your head in here, and you see how wrong your imagination actually is on 77-1 performance.
1 Like
i want some of what this guys smoking lol, the r77-1 will out pull an aim120 pretty easily so im not sure where your getting that from just playing the game should disprove that bit of head cannon the aim120 for sure has less drag but its thrust is also way worse to compensate , the r77-1 is simply better in more situations than its worse its not just stat cards but facts and actually gameplay.
1 Like
It’s the same story as always. Something something drag, something something range.
R-77-1 proceeds to pull a 270° turn on a close-medium range plane while AIM-120’s advantage is to annoy people by making their RWR bark at 40km launches that require only a gentle turn to be dodged.
Being able to launch a missile from further away to be a RWR nuisance is not an advantage.
Being able to launch an undodgeable missile at actual gameplay engagement ranges IS an advantage.
5 Likes
Both are advantages , to deny that is to admit blatant bias, plenty of ppl do the bvr larp and you need range for that
One is an advantage that perfectly fits the core of the game’s meta.
The other is an advantage that’s barely relevant within the game’s meta save for exceptions.
That’s the difference.
This is like saying that Challenger 2 is better than T-80BVM because “Challenger 2 is a better sniper while T-80BVM is only better at brawling, so Challenger 2 being able to engage the T-80BVM from further away makes it better” when the meta is defined by brawling and not sniping on 90% of the maps and game modes.
3 Likes
no one in this thread was able to refute this fact
wild claim, if you actually face competetive players you want the r-77-1
if you face noobs youre okay with both
2 Likes
yeah, that drag affects a lot on it’s performance especially when enemy is notching that 77-1 loses energy and speed so much more vs 120. Something what you just cant admit.
Strange, I think my 77-1’s are more like 77’s, never seen them turning 270, they are not micas or r73’s
But like i told you, stick your head on that linked topic first, and keep going.
It’s mica on 10km shots, reason why you dont want to those distances in busses called flanker, but you have to since your fox 3 is easy to dodge in under 20km shots also.
But now, keep plapping all that nonsence with your Russian bias glasses on and let’s keep back on this if they fix 77-1 wobbling and reduces drag to even near 120.
why is it called larp when you use the bvr missile for bvr
I don’t see anyone say dogfight larp when they use guns or fox2s