Should the MICA EM receive a historical correction to its range?
With the opening of the dev server today, we can see that the Su-30SM is showcased with the ability to carry up to 12 R-77-1s. Thanks to @dark_claw, we can reference his chart showing that the R-77-1 in tests outranges all other ARHs in the game at high altitude and high speed launches.
Spoiler
While it was understandable that a report regarding MICA’s range was not of high priority due to its maneuvering capabilities, it cannot be said that the MICA would still remain competitive in the face of 12 R-77-1s. MICA may still retain some maneuvering advantages over R-77-1, however it would be outshined in many important areas such as acceleration, time-to-hit, overall range, and quantity. With the Rafale a maximum of 8 MICAs can be carried while for the Mirage 2000-5F a maximum of only 6 can be carried compared to double that on the future Su-30SM, while it still retains the ability to carry an additional 2 R-73s on top of 12 R-77-1s.
A historical report had been created in an attempt to rectify the MICA missile’s missing range. Testing shows that the MICA missile is incapable of achieving 30Gs at 13km away in a vertical launch configuration. It also showed that the MICA missile is incapable of achieving Mach 3 in a vertical launch configuration.
MICA missile missing some kinetic energy // Gaijin.net // Issues
Spoiler
27 Likes
This should be done ASAP, followed by the reversal of several artificial nerfs to many ARH dated from July 2024.
If Russia is getting an upgrade to an already good missile in medium to close ranges, then the rest should at the very least get their best possible ARH versions without compromising the arrival of new missiles at all.
17 Likes
I definitely agree it’s still outrageous MICA EM has a fake 50km range limit and is limited in kinetic range while Gaijin purposefully gives R-77-1 to Russia without any conterpart for any other nation. This is just an R27ER case again.
13 Likes
Yes, while Russia did need a PESA aircraft with R-77-1, it is high time to make sure the Rafale is not outdated.
3 Likes
Bumped 🙌
France needs another fix, now with R-77-1 in the game, and MICA still in gimped state, there are absolutely zero reason to give its historical power rather than sticking to artificial nerf.
Just like how Magic 2 receive its IRCCM when IRCCM Missile was introduced to the game.
7 Likes
Doesn’t this make powercreep worse, with one of the best aircraft, getting better at the only thing it wasn’t good at?
4 Likes
The Su-30SM is arguably also getting better at the only thing it wasn’t good at (if you don’t take R-27ER into account).
The Su-30SM would have been a strong WVR fighter when looking at its TVC capabilities, and R-73s. But now it also gets a PESA radar, 12 R-77-1, with the option to exchange them for R-27ET or R-27ER.
5 Likes
AMRAAM is already good, it isn’t gimped as the others, Russian Mains deserve the missile so it can be competitive at least for now, so does France getting its missile fixed from ahistorical and artificial nerf.
9 Likes
False, It has also been gimped.
Also false, a buff on its range would really be something within historical margins.
5 Likes
Isn’t this the problem for all Fox 3 Missile? I mean MICA EM still have so many drag which make it ahistorical.
I see, then AIM-120 too need to be buffed and this will make MICA buff more justified.
2 Likes
That’s why I agree with OP that MICAs should really be the first ARH to get fixed —if there’s any priority to it—, followed by a reversal on several artificial nerfs on drag and AOA to other ARH missiles.
I honestly prefer that path over getting a new flock of missiles.
7 Likes
Yeah, thanks for the correction, that will make MICA buff more justified, since I thought only MICA get artificial nerf.
2 Likes
So the f15 was too strong because it has 8 ARH, but 50% more on another airframe totally fine.
Typical gaijin moment and I can’t wait for all the hypocrites to explain away how this is actually “fair and balanced.”
Not that I give too much of a crap because I’m not good at air, but I sure love watching people spin up some BS.
6 Likes
Most missiles like the mica, aam-4, derby etc are purposely misrepresented in order to balance them against the early aim-120 and r-77.
Now if russia can have the best missile in one, if not the best platform with the most missile count while other nations have nerfed missiles or in the case of aim-120a/b which are much older missiles, there is a clear unbalance.
And they still didn’t fix the ef2000 radar and rafale bugs, and the IRST switching problem. That is really outrageous.
4 Likes
I’m quite curious how this will turn out.
New R-77-1 mounted in large numbers on a new probably quite maneuverable airframe with ability to turn off the AOA limiter and PESA radar ?
What could possibly go wrong…
4 Likes
Then give AMRAAM users AIM-120C for the end of the line jets.
MICA can pull crazy 270° turns to hit targets at ridiculous angles with the 50G thrust vectoring…
The ONE advantage AIM-120 is suppossed to have is range- now it could not even have that? And with R-77-1 coming too, on top of that…
So yeah. Give AIM-120C, and fine by me.
But I can’t see why AMRAAM users must be capped to 120As while everyone gets crazy 50G missiles and now ALSO with range.
9 Likes
Mica should be the least of your worry now…
And i remind you that the point of this game is not to do accurate battle, but to put ~ equal vehicles against each other.
6 Likes
120C-5 is still probably not needed. Correct 120A/B or C-(1 to 4, which improves maneuvering with stronger actuators and slightly more range due to less drag) is probably competitive enough.
12 Likes
To be fair, that’s a completely separate topic. If you wish to make another topic dealing with that request, I’m happy to support it by liking the topic and giving you a vote, but it’s different than this topic.
10 Likes
