Idk bro gaijin has a habit of not implementing features.One of mig31s main things is that it can engage 4 diffrent people with sarhs at once which probably wont get added. But yeah mig25 did get the special treatment of a pure bs flightmodel
2 Likes
Well… We’ve gotten aiming points for salvo firing of A2G. Would not be surprised if they added a new mechanic for essentially the same thing but A2A purely for the Mig-31
bro gaijin hates soviet stuff besides shit like SU-30,s
MiG-31 would be the MiG-25 on illegal substances. Depending on which one, let’s say MiG-31BM or MiG-31I with the modern avionics it would be slinging Mach 6 telephone poles from 4 time zones away.
What’s wrong with it?
All soviet vehicles are overperforming and get preferrential treatment.
Like the T-80s probably have around 3x the armour they should have, and they just systemically denied Anti-ERA to a load of NATO rounds and called the primary docs “wrong” because their modeling of the T-80U is more accurate.
yeah like how they ignore reports about Radar modes for planes like Mig-23/25, and hold back their armement and capablilites. although i will agree they get better treatment in naval. and no lol they dont get preferrential treatment lmao
Which also get better than IRL FMs and a lower BR than what equivalents have.
All vehicles get restricted loadouts. Heck. both get all-aspect missiles at BRs where other nations are usually still stuck with rear-aspect on anything faster than sub-sonic or ground attackers.
Soviet bug reports consistantly get fixed significantly faster than any other nation. Reports are not held to the same standard, and western sources are often thrown out due to made up reasons. DM53 for example had 15 ish primary sources submitted for anti-era vs K5 and the report was rejected due to a lack of information. L27A1 was denied Anti-era because they conclude the primary source was wrong because the L27A1 cant pen the in-game model of the T-80Us UFP. which to anyone else would mean the T-80Us UFP is overperforming, but to gaijin, means the primary sources are wrong.
Do I even need to mention the current state of the SU-30SM2, which gets IBRIS, TVC engines and doubel rack R-77-1s it never had IRL or the Pantsir S1, SM-SV and Buk that is just dominating the SPAA. Or the MI-28NM, or the BMPT. etc. They are nearly the meta in every single gamemode at the moment. The only thing they are lacking is a true top tier MBT.
It pulls 7g. Irl its rated for like 3. Also its sustained turn and stuff is just pure bs lmao it should be a miracle that it can turn but it just flies like a normal heavy ish plane ingame
2 Likes
no 4.5G but thats a saftey limit it can pull 11G,s with damage to the aircraft
thats quite the understatement but ok. It might be able to do that but for a fraction of a second max. That plane however cannot come even close to having a 7 g sustained turn which you can do ingame
idk what it was but WT has a 1.5X structural durebility multiplier. which makes a lot of planes more maneuverable than they would irl
idk you might be right but its still weird how a plane with such wingloading can fly that way
Aircraft have 1.5x the structural integrity, which means they can survive things they cant IRL. But they dont have 1.5x the turn performance than they do IRL. If the Mig-25 can pull 7Gs in game, but should only do 4.5, then its overperforming.
make that 3x R-33 and 2x R-40TD/TD1 or replace the R-40’s with R-60M’s and gain back that R-33, the reason i say this is because the MiG-31’s avionics cannot interface with the R-40’s unless a translation pod is placed in one of the R-33 mounts
might be, i’d have to open my book on it again but it’s getting a bit late for me to do this
its a real thing, but its a goody topic. cus there is countless pictures of it carrrying the R-40TD1 but with out the pod. but i think thats for the datalink for the missile and is probably optinal