yeah and it should also be a user’s right to say when another user is chronically wrong and saying outlandish things unless you are fine with trolls and/or people muddying the waters in every thread (what am I saying, of course you guys are fine with that)
2 Likes
Maybe 13.0 assuming TT goes up. Otherwise no way.
They honestly need to make a rule against ragebaiting imo.
1 Like
Ragebaiting and trolling is a rule violation already.
I already unintentionally follow the rules cause I’m exclusively sincere and only address posts, not people.
im a little late to this discussion but i do agree the mig-29 needs to be looked at and reconfigured.
i find a good idea is for the german and hungary mig-29 9.12 remove the r-27er since they were also not exported and add the r-27r1 but keep the r-60m and bring them down to 12.3br.
this can also be done for the russian mig-29 9.13 if they would add the mig-29s 9.13s with r73 and r-27er
bring down the mig-29g and mig-29s 9.13s (r-73 version) to 12.7br.
i agree 12.7 and 13.0 are the correct br for the mig-29 but the problem is br compression at 13.0br. at 13.0 everyone takes a Su-33 or Su-27.
orrr they all get the r-73 and the r-27er at 12.7br. idk what to do with the mig-29g then. maybe give it fox3 like the smt but it’s hard to find info on the mig-29g. all i know is nato standard.
The Mig-29G in its current form should be at 13.0 with R-73s and R-27ERs. It’s main issue is the BR compression at that tier, but outside of that it’s fine.
I wouldn’t mind if the earlier German and Hungarian ones went to 12.3, because I think they would be too good at 12.7 with R-73s.
I’m not sure what to do with the Russian variant.
I am not very invested here, but irl the mig-29 9.12/13 absolutely outperforms the f-16, later mig-29s with bigger fuel tanks don’t perform as well but mig-29 9.12/13 outperforms f-16A, so outperforms all f-16s.
Apparently it flies like an f-18 with more thrust.
Citation needed
1 Like
I would like the 9-12 and9-13 getting its load out reworked -R27ER +R73 although br placement is the main issue 13.0 having the mig 29g with R27ER and R73. 12.7 with R73 on a decent air frame is a bit to strong
1 Like
umm idk google it, at low speed it out performs f-16A’s, If I remember correctly.
I will repeat my takes again:
Mig-29 is an inferior dogfighter to Mirage 2000.
Mig-29 is a superior BVR aircraft to Mirage 2000 due to acceleration, radar, and R-27ER.
These are takes I’ve been stating since 2021, and on the forum since 2023:
And here’s the data for acceleration:
People have claimed that Lein and I were wrong about Mirage 2000 being a better dogfighter, but they are wrong to claim that.
Edit:
The reason I edit posts is because they contain errors in typing or wording.
Many of my posts I found misrepresented my views so I fixed my mistakes and the existing posts are a better representation of my views I’ve had since 2021.
I apologize for the inconvenience of the original error-ridden posts.
MiG-29 is inferior to a lot of planes
Please ignore this post, it’s a year old.
Alvis is just coping a bit that people can look at this and see that he is just gaslighting.
1 Like
Based on what evidence?
Both planes have very different modeling discrepancies in game.
Based on Statshark and dogfights.
@Grossaaaa claiming that it’s “gaslighting” to say Mirage 2000 is a better dogfighter. lol
My first post on the topic BTW:
Sorry I thought you were speaking about in real life.
In-game energy retention in the Mirage is nothing comparable to EM chart.
Lein wasn’t with Alvis on this topic. If you scroll up, you can see that Alvis had the opinion that the Mig was a better dogfighter than the Mirage.
Lein then said they should duel, which has proven what he and I have stated (the Mirage is better). Alvis then changed his opinion and is, as per usual, trying to gaslight people into believing he was right.