So like the Harrier, Tornado, F-14, etc etc. I dont really see the issue here.
Yes that is why it is at 11.7 It also has the superior SARH missiles.
Only if the meta was hugging the deck at 60m… Wait…
Mig-23 has 60 large calibre CMs, Most F4s have 60 standard CMs except the FGR2/FG1 which have 90. Mig-23 has the superior CMs either way though as Large CMs are around 5x more effective than regular CMs
Mig-23s can readily catch the fastest Phantoms which are the FGR2/FG1, so… Not at low alt they arent
72 if you take the CM pod. Also, taking the CM pod only makes every other flare fire twice, so you end up getting way more flare pops than without the pod.
So does the Mig-23. It does have worse fuel efficiency, but it is faster overall (I think).
R-24Rs are way faster at close range, need to be at 10km+ before Aim-7/Skyflash would win in a joust, but below 8km. R-24R will always hit first,
I was not aware that any F-4s at or around 11.7 were equipped with Aim-9Ms, so I dont know why you are throwing that out there. But we could give all the F-4s currently stuck at 12.0 their historically accurate Aim-9Ls instead of leaving them with rear-aspect only IRs vs Mig-23ML/MLDs all-aspect IRs, including the pseudo IRCCM missile the R-24T at 11.7
R-24Rs have higher acceleration but not higher top speed.
Seems to me you don’t know the aircraft specs.
And your distance is backed by… your opinion? Do you have any supporting chart data to that claim?
I never said that there were. Rather you brought up deck level flying with IR aams. Which guess what tons of aim-9m carrying planes do? Same “problem”, different nation and br.
The R-24T is hardly irccm. If your talking about it getting data tracking via the IR radar mode, then that is something in a whole other ball park.
Oh neat! Tells you how long it’s been since I’ve played them. I considered getting the Mig-23ML, but it’s not on sale on Xbox yet, not to mention I have the F-4S which I like far more.
Nope, I always thought A-10C should equal the BR of the Su-25T/Su-39, but maintained reservations on how good it would actually be given it is an A-10 at that BR. People were saying it should be 12.3+ just because it had Aim-9Ms which was obviously totally insane.
I said 12.0 especially since it meant if in sim or AAb it would have a lineup with the F4S, and not to mention it wasn’t going to get that load out at first but the USA mains rebelled against gaijin citing “it needed it’s real life weapons” which the Su-39 is lacking.
I still see A-10Cs doing really well on average thanks to 4 irccm aams. Which is insane to think it can see 10.7
if it wasnt for the fact the missiles are constantly on drugs. in the same match i had another r24r go for a dudes magic 2 instead of the enemy, and ive had them straight up not guide many times(thats the fault of the junk radar me thinks)
When people complain about russia its usually ground rb, and they have good reason. Arb is a problem only at top tier, russia at lower tiers is extremely good. At prop tier they have arguably the best aircraft, and early jets are very good too. Mig 21s are decent/quite good depending on the mode mig 23s also pretty balanced(though incosistent as in my experience) i dint see why gaijin doesnt fix russian top tier, its no like fixing the flight models and slightly lowering the r77 drag would make them broken(hell it wouldnt even make them competitive just less weak), and i forgot but russian cas at topt ier is way too good. I understand people being annoyed at thst considering the only reason its like thst is because they artificially gimp other nations cas
I think that the Mig 23 should be at same BR or lower thant the F 16 and F 15, if we want to take into consideration the fact that in the Goulf War, american F 16s and F 15s fought against Mig 23 and MIG 29,
