yea Asymetrical balance, R-73 is better in every way but at least R-27ER is also better in every way but dont forget R-77 is worse in exactly one way and better in every other
Soo when Gr.4 and Gr.9a get added
The problem of naval is that they introduced it absolutely terrible. Huge grind for few vehicles (or similar vehicles) and you were forced to play torpedo boats first.
If they added naval now with the content we have right now it would have been mor popular even on long term
2 Likes
well in that case couldnt they have just named it the 120b then as the 7f and 7m are carbon copys as the monopulse changes still have not been implemented and i highly doubt it ever will.
I am trying to cope with the fact that Russia is blatantly superior to the U.S in nearly every way and you are not helping xD
1 Like
Different numbers now, we presume.
Cut naval battle R&D budget. Use the funds to add more pinups instead
Sounds about right
That’s what happens when one nation gets vehicles 20 years newer than the other
1 Like
boi im trying to cope with that Phantom still
like that thing is just a pure L in every way
Sis. Dogfight an F-16 in a MiG-29 then say that again.
1 Like
this is not what this is about
also I have and ive won most of the time because of R73
dont even get started for ground, i would say air is reasonably balanced as of right now. ground on the other hand is a clusterfck that never will be fixed.
I’m not really a coastal fan. I love frigates and other intermediate sized vessels irl but in-game I just can’t get behind them for some reason (and also I don’t want to go through a million RP to get to the ones I don’t have yet as cool as they are).
Mutsu kept me in the game last patch, but this one? As much as I think they’d be a bad idea, I’d rather they added submarines now just so something happens on the naval side. I guess I’ll hold out hope that the dev server or patch day will bring a previously unannounced addition. If not, then a three-month break from the game could be a good thing.
1 Like
Potentially different numbers yeah but the premise remains relevant. The R-77 showcased in todays stream (RVV-AE) does not have a sustainer and has a substantially more draggy design due to the presence of the grid fins, as well as that it’s able to pull a higher G load so bleed more energy. In the stream it even took quite a while to hit the subsonic F-86 in the test drive from ~6km (I think?) from the rear.
you need to remember the tracking rate on the R-77 is gonna be worse as they said on the dev server, its likely gonna be the worst of the fox 3s except maybe the darter which I know nothing about.
Man i don’t wanna Even play Germany anymore the F4F ICE sucks
1 Like
Not true, it matched the aim120 in bvr at 40km in jaeks video
1 Like
i really hope they give the FGR2 9ls and mavericks, would make it actually different to the FG 2. or is it the other way round, either way i think it should be added.
In war thunder, AIM120A will probably be a bit longer ranged than the other 2, and keep its energy slightly better
If it was modelled correctly, MICA would be slightly longer ranged, and slightly faster, but not by much.
As for close range + TVC, it all boils down to : will it be bugged or not X)
During the march testing, MICA would often lose its speed because of wobbling, and it was also limited to 50km apparently, it still was at 50 on the stat card during the dev stream (should be 80).
AMRAAM was also helped by the fact that the platforms throwing it accelerate better up high than the m2k