Not much to do on that part, the true issue is the F16C, not AIM-9M itself, for ground.
Well the Damage has already been done and its not possible to reverse it anymore.
So either people will adopt more and more or they will stay out of top tier.
Only smokeless missiles like the AIM-9M and AAM-3 would need to have contrails modelled, all other missiles have very thick smoke trails already which irl would also include the contrail anyway. Firing an R-73 at low altitude or high altitude would look exactly the same, but firing the 9M at low alt would make it invisible and at high alt make it look like a 9L.
1 Like
That’s the part that makes me laugh. Same people that complain about modern weapon effectiveness are also the ones saying they want more modern weapons / platforms. The weapons are going to get better. Either adapt or die.
2 Likes
Exactly, Gaijin warned them about this issue plenty of times yet they kept demanding it.
This will only get worse for them if they dont adapt to this current meta.
2 Likes
The issue currently is the F16C, that plane shouldn’t be into the game atleast until more advanced other planes comes.
You shouldn’t be able to do that type of stuff to begin with, atleast for now, if people wanted balance, but clearly people does not want it.
1 Like
Unfortunately they have denied adding the 9Li, The Gripen did carry AIM9M, but I believe only the Czech Republic bought/used them? But information regarding this stuff is very lacking, still some secrecy.
Since pretty much all the modern IR missiles (Mica, Aim9X, Iris-T, Python 5 etc) that the Gripen are compatible with have been denied for now I don’t think it’s that much of a reach to give it 9M’s, after all it is sitting at the highest new battle rating of 12.7.
2 Likes
So, I agree that there are some planes (F-16C, JAS-39s, MiG-29SMT) that should not have been introduced yet and the devs probably should have fleshed out the rest of the Cold War before going forward…but the cat is out of the bag. Tech is going to accelerate.
Well considering how unrealible AGM-65D’s are and Mirage2000-5F has similiar capabilites its not much of a big deal in this case.
Real problem is besides USA and France no other nation has similiar safe CAS potential(you can also count British Tornado GR1 with PGM loadout but that thing is a huge flying brick against any proper Sam systems).
The Mirage 2000-5F does not have similar capabilites. Only two things that comes close to the moment are Mirage 2000-5F and JH-7A, the rest is inferior.
And even then, the F16C or D is miles better than both. Considering you have a better airframe and better A2A capabilities while still doing cas.
The Mig-29SMT is not that good, both for CAS and Air Capabilities to be truthfuly honest with you.
Having 2 Nords missiles that can effectively engage and kill from 10km and couple Gbus is pretty effective, not to mention you can always equipped with PGM missiles if you wanna play safe even more(that will reduce your cas capacity but it will be much safer option) and lets not forget DAMOCLES targeting pod makes a huge difference in identfying and finding targets compare to bugged lightning 2 on F-16C.
Both platforms have their own pros and cons.
As for A2A option, Well i didnt thought about that part so yea İ’ll give points to F-16C in that case but unlike F-16C or Mirage2000-5F Barak-2 is only limited to Gbus which makes it less effective against Sam systems.
There is no point in arguing with this “panther2995” guy as he isn’t open for real debate. Guy is just trolling/waste arguing.
Even if you prove him wrong with concrete evidence he is either going to try and argue using logical fallacies or he is going to ignore you being correct.
1 Like
Mavericks can do that from 14-15 KM without much issues. As long as your objective is killing SPAA’s Mavs does this job perfectly.
You do not need to do that at all with the F16C, you can carry 6 mavericks and 2 GBU-24, and keep 1-2 Mavericks for SEAD and they work perfectly on that part.
Good point, though the F16C tpod is bugged.
Grown up and get over it already, you’re acting like a child now.
Ofcourse i’m going to bring awaraness to your trolling even if you don’t like it.
I don’t recognise Panther from other threads, but in this thread his replies/arguments have been perfectly fine and well formulated?
Follow the link and scroll up. He tried to act genuine in that thread too. In reality he wasn’t up for a real debate despite trying to say so.
1 Like
Mavericks are unreliable thats the issue, sure they have better range and gives much safer approach but damage is random even against Spaa’s, tho points for F-16 in this case.
Thats also my point, on paper F-16 has better option in practise it will be the same if your Mavericks works perfectly.
Yea im still waiting for a fix on that case.
İt seems like this issue comes to personal choice, i do like nords more then Mavericks and DAMOCLES targeting pod but one thing true that F-16 has better capabilites on paper and in practise(as long as Mavericks works fine).
1 Like
He’s loves to cry because i used “no one” instead of “majority” word.
He tried to debunk my argument by using that spesific word and kept going until there was nothing left.