Youโre completely ignoring this and many other things
1 Like
Elaborate? I specifically mentioned the FGR.2. What do you mean by Iโm ignoring them?
Next type that before you edit the message. We canโt see this because of the private account, and you know that.
i mean thinking about it, the fgr2 could also have sraam added to it but it wonโt be much improvement
Come on man, grow up.
Un-nerfed SRAAM with all-aspect capabilities would be infinitely better than what it has now lmao
1 Like
didnโt think sraam was all aspect? if it is then we need those asap
Thereโs also no option to consider BR changes. This is one of the least egregious examples, but compare to the F-4F discussion where the options are very leadingly โyes these changes are awesomeโ and โno they should stay exactly the status quoโ
Youโre really mad about this man, relax. Jesus. Lmao
Let me respond to this other guy
Itโs not, itโs side aspect at best but so are all IR missiles, even the AIM-9B has a similar launch envelope
This doesnโt really address any of my points I was making. Half of your reply is a history lesson that most of us already know about, rather than responding to the actual balance arguments I made.
The reason I suggested moving the Kurnass 2000 down is that thereโs no real justification for it being at the same battle rating as the F-16s. At 12.0, it could fill a unique role as a knife-fighting Phantom that relies somewhat on ambush tactics with its radar turned off. It would also avoid constantly facing superior airframes, something the Israeli F-16s at the same BR are already much better equipped to deal with. More importantly, it would finally give players a reason to use the aircraft again.
As for the F-4EJ Kai, it would be on roughly equal footing with the F-4J, F-4S, and FGR.2, while benefiting from the F-16โs radar. That would place it comfortably alongside the other Phantoms at 12.0.
I already explained my reasoning for the F-4J(UK), FGR.2, FG.1, the F-4Fs, and the American naval Phantoms and you can read those too.
None of your points actually address the arguments I made, they mostly explain the aircraftโs history instead of discussing their in-game balance.
Yes because i didnt play them ? J dont want to make a opinion based on nothing.
But i will since you asked.
Like any plane ? Stock grind is always hard.
Yes because they are in no need of a change. I agree to add countermeasures to f4f early but no aim9l.
F4f with 9L at 11.3 will just make its gameplay harder. A non fox1 going against fox1 users. 11.0 is fine
I was okay with it but now i completely disagree. Useless addition to begin with.
F4 can take a lot of fuel. You can also take little fuel and have a big center center tank.
The FG Phantoms also have lower fuel consumption than the others.
TSFC of 1.74 vs 2.1.
So the 9 minutes SL of the Americans turn into 10 minutes with higher thrust for the Speys.
The crazy part is they have a carrier spawn.
So less range to travel which mean less fuel are needed.
It would be fine at 11.3 with AIM-9Ls
And now youโre just being petty. Some you guys are so difficult. This is why we canโt have shit in warthunder.
R-27ER?
The Phantomโs radar has been pretty solid in my experience. You are switching it to PD mode right?
Apparently Iโm the only person who enjoys playing the FGR.2?
1 Like
You could be enjoying something so much better. Donโt let Gaijin leave the Phantoms behind.
R-27ER was powercreep, but AIM-7F to R-27ER was less powercreep than [at the time] Skyflash to AIM-7F.
As time went on, Skyflash & AIM-7E2 got lower maneuvering delays.
R-27R got maneuvering โbuffsโ.
Super 530s were improved.
With the introduction of AIM-7F, it was nasty.
Didnโt help people didnโt know about defeating radar missiles as much as we do now.
Iโve long been an advocate of giving the Phantom FGR.2 AIM-9Ls (and SuperTEMP) to differentiate it from the FG.1, and give people the option of playing a less well-equipped aircraft at a correspondially lower BR if they want to.
The only thing I have voiced opposition to is giving the F-4J(UK) flare dispensers it never had, or replacing it with a re-skined FGR.2.