When might the mig 21 bison get its r77’s / rvv-ae’s? I am aware of the current balancing of vehicles with active radar missiles at lower br’s. I understand it hasnt recieved these missiles at its current br but since the premium su30’s were added with their r77’s i feel like theres no excuses now, especialy since the bison with its pitiful payload can fight these su30’s in uptiers. I would suggest upping the bison to 12.7 with 2 r77’s or 13.0 with the tandem r73 mounts as well.
1 Like
r77 will be 13.0 min. the only ARH missile that is being set below that is the agm54.
Moving it straight up in BR
gaijin here’s your chance to have two W in a row
dynamic BRs (based on installed mods)
2 Likes
nah that would be very confusing
It will be probably a nerf, not a buff. 13.0 bison sounds like a torture, even with r77.
You mean this?
I don’t know why people haven’t voted it to the moon … instead they whine about loadouts, BRs and balance ALL THE TIME.
Not at all. They can make explanation in the mod and even mark it in the side of the loadout you create so someone can track it real time.
It’s not that difficult.
And what’s funnier is that this isn’t even going to be exclusive to air as well, we could also apply this for certain features of ground as well, with certain munitions being excluded from a vehicle’s loadout due to balance reasons within their br bracket, implementing this sort of system can allow the vehicle’s BR to be raised or lowered depending on the type of ammunition ,equipped" with it being unavailable to be equipped in battle once they’ve entered at a lower br for example.
All of this is easier said than done of course cause it will affect hundreds of vehicles and the game balance in general and future additions because the devs would have to test out multiple br brackets for every singular vehicle with this feature, so I’d expect a rollout plan for this to be akin to what they’ve been doing with custom loadouts except probably twice as slow. I also am concerned that they may not even be planning on adding this kind of feature at all because of the addition of the Mig-29 9.12 just so that the Mig-29 9.13 can have R73 missiles, which is a whole other and more than not identical vehicle to the latter that just doesn’t have the ability to equip R73s.
“Surely Bison with ARHs will be more balanced!”
The humble F-15E and ARH Hornets:
That would be a huge Gaijin L.
Banning loadout changes in-match would be horrific. [The consequence of dynamic BRs]
The only thing they could do is implement loadout restrictions like what DCS has so they can restrict vehicle weapons in matches.
But why? We never get to test any fox 3s below 13.0 that arent stupid long range, cause they cant pull but what about the opposite… youd be sat with a mig21 with 2 arh, 10km hmd, very poor fm for br, and very short range fox 3, weve had aim54a at 12.3 which was a nightmare cause of bvr, (aswell as fakours but thats neither here nor there) having a short range hard pulling missile wouldnt be strange for the br, aswell as having to learn to notch is a thing since 10.0 (definetly with mig25s about), the only real issue is people complaining its prem bias cause it is, although it could be tech tree as a different vehicle in both russia and britain/ india (dont know why russia doesnt have a mig21 modernised yet anyway in tech tree)
Edit: i mean for 12.7 bison or variant with this
If they code things up, just like how they limit weaponry selection before unlocking modification.
Or SP changes in GRB
We might still change loadout in matches
Choose base modification just like how we choose the deck before queue.
Sees the weapon which has the highest BR
(If the user selects R-27R + R-73 loadouts, and R-73 for Bison hits 12.3/while R-77 for Bison hits 13.0, then Bison’s BR in that match is 12.3)
Restrict any loadout which has a higher value than 12.3BR
However, keep them to changing loadouts that have the same or lower BR value in the match.
Probably hard to implement.
Still, it does not ban in-game loadout changes, as you mentioned.
Don’t overreact to the idea.
It is your bad habit, pal.
Well, ‘in the current system’
I prefer to keep my MiG-21Bison as a rat plane in 12.3 with R-73+R-27R/T.
And adding R-77-capable MiG-21 Bison(Late.) as a regular tech tree variant in 13.0 would be better.
MiG-21bison with R-77 will be 13.0 minimum if we think about JA37DI.
I don’t want to make my Bison as perma-slapped by those 13.3-14.0BR jets such as Su-30 or F-15C/E.
Modernised MiG-21 with R-77 in 13.0 wouldn’t hold against Su-30 with R-77 in 13.3.
But if we implement payload-based BR…
Maybe then it will be fine.
that version would more likely come as the russian mig21-93 in russian tt with a pesa radar
Damn, I wanted to see those R-77-fied MiG-21 in our TT either…
this is also apart of my point; if missiles dictate br then how is it sensible to have an su30 (a far superior airframe) with 6 rvv-ae at 13.3 as an absolute seal clubbing machine, yet a mig21-93 would be so much of a sadmobile with its ARH missiles. I think its a question of decompressing this br range allowing for such vehicles.
it would have access to 4
there is no mig21 bison late
because the whole purpose of the bison programm was to give aging migs better weponry
Could be 4, but for the sake of it not being a guarranteed 13.0, 2 would be 12.7 area
A better option is instead of adding the mig-21 bison with r-77s, they should add the mig-21-93 with r77s which was the prototype for the bison with double the counter measures and has a pesa radar instead of the normal mechanically scanned kopoyo radar.
That way they don’t have to modify the existing bison while still adding a mig 21 with r77s.
It would essentially be a kfir c10 equivalent
1 Like